DATA SNAPSHOT LaGrange County Data SnapShot Series 1.1 October 2015

01 03 02 04 Table of contents Introduction Economy Demography Labor Market

01 introduction Purpose About LaGrange County

Introduction Purpose This document provides information and data about LaGrange County that can be used to guide local decision- making activities. The Data SnapShot showcases a variety of demographic, economic and labor market information that local leaders, community organizations and others can use to gain a better perspective on current conditions and opportunities in their county. To strengthen the value and usability of the information, we showcase the data using a variety of visual tools, such as charts, graphs and tables. In addition, we offer key points about the data as a way of assisting the user with the interpretation of the information presented. Finally, short takeaway messages are offered at the end of each section in order to highlight some of the more salient findings. section 01

About LaGrange County Introduction County Background Established 1832 Seat LaGrange Area 387 sq. mi. Neighboring Counties Branch, MI DeKalb, IN Elkhart, IN Noble, IN St. Joseph, MI Steuben, IN Metropolitan Status Non-metro section 01

02 demography Population change Population pyramids Race Ethnicity Educational attainment Takeaways 02 demography

Population change 2000 2010 2014 2020 Total population projections Demography Population change Total population projections The total population is projected to increase by 2 percent between 2014 and 2020. 2000 2010 2014 2020 The county’s total population increased by 10 percent between 2000 and 2014. Natural increase (births minus deaths over that span of time) was the major contributor to that expansion, with a gain of more than 6,700 persons. International migration also increased by 478 individuals, indicating that the county experienced an influx of new people from outside the United States. In contrast, domestic migration (the difference between the number of people moving into the county versus moving out) resulted in a loss of 3,397 individuals in LaGrange County between 2000 and 2014. Components of Population Change, 2000-2014 Total Change 3,716* Natural Increase 6,833 International Migration 478 Domestic Migration -3,397 section 02 *Total change in population differs from the sum of the components due to Census estimation techniques. Residuals (not reported here) make up the difference. Sources: STATSIndiana, U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census, 2010 Decennial Census, 2014 Estimates, Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change

Demography Population pyramids Population pyramids are visual representations of the age distribution of the population by gender. 2000 2014 Male Female Male Female Approximately 49.4% of the population was female in 2000 (17,228 people) and that percentage remained about the same in 2014. What did change is the distribution of people across the various age categories. A larger share of people shifted into the higher age groupings over the 2000 to 2014 time period. People 50 and over increased from 23.9% to 29.1% from 2000 to 2014, and individuals of prime working age (20 to 49) dipped from 38.9% to 34.7% of the population. Residents under 20 years of age comprised 36.2% of the total population in 2014, making them a larger proportion of the population than those of prime working age. section 02 Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2014 Annual Population Estimates

Demography Race 2000 The proportion of non-White residents in LaGrange County nearly doubled between 2000 and 2014, although they remain a small part of the overall population. Every race experienced a numerical increase over the time period. Of the non-White races, the Black (+99) population gained the most. The Black (+134 percent) and Native* American (+91 percent) populations had the largest percentage growth. The White population increased by 3,367 residents between 2000 and 2014, experiencing the smallest percentage gain (+10 percent). Despite the growth of the non-White population, in 2014 White residents still represented 98 percent of the county’s total population. 2014 *Native includes American Indian, Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islanders. section 02 Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2014 Annual Population Estimates

3% 4% Ethnicity Demography Hispanic - 2000 Hispanics are individuals of any race whose ancestry is from Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Spain, the Dominican Republic or any other Spanish- speaking Central or South American country. There were 1,092 Hispanics residing in LaGrange County in 2000. This figure expanded to 1,509 by 2014, a 38.2 percent increase. Due to this numeric increase, the proportion of Hispanics in the population is now hovers around the 4 percent mark. 3% Hispanic - 2014 4% section 02 Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2014 Annual Population Estimates

Educational attainment Demography Educational attainment LaGrange County had a 3 percentage point increase in the number of adults (25 and older) with an associate’s, bachelor’s or graduate degree between 2000 and 2013. The proportion of adults 25 years of age and older with a high school education or more improved from 60 percent in 2000 to 62 percent by 2013. Those with a high school degree only fell slightly from 34 percent in 2000 to 31 percent in 2013. Adults with a college degree increased from 12 percent in 2000 to 15 percent in 2013. This was due to a 2 percentage point increase in the proportion of residents with associate’s degrees (3 percent versus 5 percent), while the proportion of adults with at least a bachelor's degree increased from 9 percent to 10 percent, a 1 percentage point growth. . 2000 2013 section 02 Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 ACS

Demography The educational attainment of adults 25 and over has improved since 2000, but the percentage of adults with a high school education only (31 percent) or less (38 percent) remains sizable. Taking time to assess whether local economic development opportunities might be impeded by the presence of a sizable number of adults with a terminal high school degree or less may be worthy of attention. While 15 percent of adult residents of the county have an associate’s, bachelor’s or higher degree, this figure is 16 percentage points below the figure for the state of Indiana as a whole in 2013. The impact of the county’s large Amish community on the demographics of LaGrange County is evident in the large youth population and low levels of educational attainment. LaGrange County may wish to assess the workforce skills of workers with a high school education only. Making sure these skills are in alignment with the needs of local businesses and industries may be worth exploring. Takeaways The population of LaGrange County is expected to grow over the next few years, and if past trends hold, that increase will be largely due to natural increase (more births than deaths). LaGrange County’s age structure suggests that a larger share of residents are in older age brackets than in 2000. The number of persons 50 years of age or older increased by over 5 percentage points between 2000 and 2014. On the other hand, the proportion of adults of prime working age (20 to 49 years old) and youth under 20 years of age has declined. Despite this, more than 36 percent of the county’s population was less than 20 years of age in 2014. As such, the challenge for the county is how to invest in programs and services that meet the needs of a sizable youth population as well as those of a growing senior population. section 02

03 economy Establishments Industries Occupations Income and poverty Takeaways 03 economy

0 1 3 4 Establishments Definition of Company Stages Economy The number of establishments in LaGrange County increased by 90 percent from 2000 to 2011. The rapid growth of establishments was largely due to natural change. Between 2000 and 2011, 2,545 establishments were launched in the county, while 1,275 closed, resulting in a gain of 1,301 establishments. There was also a small gain of 31 establishments due to net migration. An establishment is a physical business location. Branches, stand-alones and headquarters are all considered types of establishments. Definition of Company Stages 0 1 Components of Change for Establishments Total Change (2000-11) 1,301 Natural Change (births minus deaths) 1,270 Net Migration 31 Self-employed 2-9 employees 3 10-99 employees 100-499 employees 4 500+ employees section 03 Note: The 2011 figures use 2012 data to include all gains and losses over the entire year. Establishment information was calculated in-house and may differ slightly from publicly available data. Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database

Number of establishments by stage/employment category Economy Number of establishments by stage/employment category 2000 2011 Stage Establishments Proportion Stage 0 399 27% 965 35% Stage 1 824 57% 1,573 Stage 2 202 14% 195 7% Stage 3 24 2% 19 1% Stage 4 4 0% 2* Total 1,453 100% 2,754 The NETS Database is derived from the Dun & Bradstreet archival national establishment data, a population of known establishments in the United States that is quality controlled and updated annually. Establishments include both private and public sector business units and range in size from one employee (i.e., sole-proprietors and self-employed) to several thousand employees. *ReferenceUSA indicates one Stage 4 firm in 2011, whereas NETS shows two Stage 4 firms. Additional information is available on the next slide. section 03 Note: The 2011 figures use 2012 data to include all gains and losses over the entire year. Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database

Top five employers in 2015 Economy Establishment Stage 1. Champion Home Builders, Inc. Stage 4 2. Nishikawa Cooper, LLC Stage 3 3. K-Z, Inc.* 4. Lakepark Industries–Indiana* 5. Open Range RV Company* The top five employers produce mainly national and global goods and services. Champion Home Builders in Topeka, also known as Redman Homes, is the largest establishment-level employer in LaGrange County. The top employers in LaGrange County are primarily engaged in manufacturing prefabricated homes, recreational vehicles and vehicle parts that are sold throughout the nation and world. Information on the top five establishments by employment comes from ReferenceUSA. ReferenceUSA is a library database service provided by Infogroup, the company that also supplies the list of major employers for Hoosiers by the Numbers. While both NETS and ReferenceUSA contain establishments, differences in data collection processes result in discrepancies between the two sources. We use NETS for a broad picture of establishments in the county, while ReferenceUSA is used for studying individual establishments. *These three companies have the same number of employees, according to ReferenceUSA, and were, therefore, listed alphabetically. section 03 Source: ReferenceUSA (Infogroup)

Number of jobs by stage/employment category Economy Number of jobs by stage/employment category 2000 2011 Stage Jobs* Proportion Stage 0 399 3% 965 6% Stage 1 2,979 19% 4,652 28% Stage 2 5,270 33% 5,295 32% Stage 3 4,696 30% 4,444 27% Stage 4 2,472 16% 1,100 7% Total 15,816 100% 16,456 section 03 *Includes both full-time and part-time jobs Note: The 2011 figures use 2012 data to include all gains and losses over the entire year. Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database

Amount of sales (2011 dollars) by stage/employment category Economy Amount of sales (2011 dollars) by stage/employment category 2000 2011 Stage Sales Proportion Stage 0 $44,596,685 2% $64,619,869 4% Stage 1 $427,321,636 19% $387,508,972 21% Stage 2 $560,683,247 25% $621,769,820 34% Stage 3 $802,078,749 36% $422,145,591 23% Stage 4 $395,356,315 18% $326,744,000 Total $2,230,036,632 100% $1,822,788,252 section 03 Note: The 2011 figures use 2012 data to include all gains and losses over the entire year. Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database

Economy Top five industries in 2014 68.2 percent of jobs are tied to one of the top five industries in LaGrange County. Manufacturing is the largest industry sector (6,576 jobs). Accommodation & Food Services is the smallest of the top industry sectors with 1,155 jobs. Of the top five industries in LaGrange County, Accommodation & Food Services (+31.3 percent) and Manufacturing (+7.1 percent) gained jobs between 2002 and 2014. Of the remaining top five industries, Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, & Hunting lost the most, with a 20.1 percent decrease in jobs. section 03 Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

Industry distribution and change Economy Industry distribution and change NAICS Code Description Jobs 2002 Jobs 2014 Change (2002-2014) % Change (2002-2014) Average Total Earnings 2014 11 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting 1,997 1,595 -402 -20% $35,646 21 Mining, Quarrying, & Oil & Gas Extraction <10 - 22 Utilities 35 68 33 94% $100,499 23 Construction 974 937 -37 -4% $29,567 31-33 Manufacturing 6,142 6,576 434 7% $57,059 42 Wholesale Trade 588 743 155 26% $26,988 44-45 Retail Trade 1,719 1,593 -126 -7% $27,775 48-49 Transportation & Warehousing 360 454 94 $33,830 51 Information 65 -32 -49% $87,913 52 Finance & Insurance 275 366 91 33% $47,113 53 Real Estate & Rental & Leasing 241 373 132 55% $20,277 54 Professional, Scientific & Technical Services 294 332 38 13% $31,633 55 Management of Companies and Enterprises 29 -24 -45% $60,972 56 Administrative & Waste Management 180 285 105 58% $21,055 61 Educational Services (Private) 253 219 -34 -13% $13,857 62 Health Care & Social Assistance 715 933 218 30% $35,307 71 Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 83 87 4 5% $14,833 72 Accommodation and Food Services 880 1,155 31% $13,989 81 Other Services (except Public Administration) 841 913 9% $22,629 90 Government 1,564 1,476 -88 -6% $43,426 99 Unclassified Industry 0% $0 All Total 17,263 18,168 905 $40,213 section 03 Note: Average total earnings include wages, salaries, supplements and earnings from Industries and occupations with a value of <10 have insufficient data for change and earnings calculations. Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

Industry distribution and change Economy Industry distribution and change The largest percentage gains in employment in LaGrange County occurred in: Utilities (+94.3 percent) Administrative, Support, Waste Management, and Remediation Services (+58.3 percent) Real Estate & Rental & Leasing (+54.8 percent) The largest percentage losses in employment occurred in: Information (-49.2 percent) Management (-45.3 percent) Employment Increase Employment Decrease Industries with the largest gains and losses in employment numbers between 2002 & 2014: Manufacturing (+434) Accommodation & Food Services (+275) Health Care & Social Assistance (+218) Agriculture & Forestry (-402) Retail Trade (-126) section 03 Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

Top five occupations in 2014 Economy Top five occupations in 2014 The top five occupations in LaGrange County represent 63.2 percent of all jobs. Production (4,673 jobs) is the top occupation classification in LaGrange County. Transportation & Material Moving is the smallest of the top five occupations with 1,270 jobs. All five top occupations in LaGrange County, with the exception of Management (-5.9 percent), had a growth in jobs between 2002 and 2014. Production occupations gained the largest proportion (+12.9 percent), while Transportation & Material Moving occupations gained the least with an ever so slight increase of 0.5 percent. section 03 Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

Occupation distribution and change Economy Occupation distribution and change SOC Description Jobs 2002 Jobs 2014 Change (2002-2014) % Change (2002-2014) Hourly Earnings 2014 11 Management 2,193 2,063 -130 -6% $20.08 13 Business & Financial Operations 387 439 52 13% $24.10 15 Computer & Mathematical 78 81 3 4% $24.97 17 Architecture & Engineering 213 188 -25 -12% $28.37 19 Life, Physical & Social Science 35 39 4 11% $22.76 21 Community & Social Service 112 0% $18.00 23 Legal 50 32 -18 -36% $35.91 25 Education, Training & Library 831 815 -16 -2% $18.40 27 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports & Media 249 262 5% $15.53 29 Health Care Practitioners & Technical 287 375 88 31% $26.80 31 Health Care Support 178 240 62 35% $11.17 33 Protective Service 137 115 -22 -16% $18.32 Food Preparation & Serving Related 852 1,049 197 23% $9.29 37 Building & Grounds Cleaning Maintenance 349 425 76 22% $9.71 Personal Care & Service 483 580 97 20% $10.18 41 Sales & Related 1,724 1,844 120 7% $14.79 43 Office & Administrative Support 1,570 1,629 59 $13.79 45 Farming, Fishing & Forestry 424 277 -147 -35% $12.47 47 Construction & Extraction 942 814 -128 -14% $15.01 49 Installation, Maintenance & Repair 594 682 15% $18.69 51 Production 4,140 4,673 533 $16.18 53 Transportation & Material Moving 1,264 1,270 6 $14.73 55 Military 118 2 2% $19.24 99 Unclassified -6 -11% $17.91 All Total 17,263 18,168 905 $16.11 section 03 Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

Occupation distribution and change Economy Occupation distribution and change The largest percentage gains in employment in LaGrange County occurred in: Healthcare Support (+34.8 percent) Healthcare Practitioners and Technical (+30.7percent) The largest percentage loss in employment occurred in: Legal (-36.0 percent) Farming, Fishing and Forestry (-34.7 percent) Occupations with the largest gains and losses in employment numbers between 2002 & 2014: Production (+533) Food Preparation & Serving (+197) Farming, Fishing & Forestry (-147) Management (-130) Construction & Extraction (-128) Employment Increase Employment Decrease section 03 Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

Income and poverty Economy 2003 2008 2013 Total Population in Poverty 7.9% 10.2% 12.7% Minors (up to age 17) in Poverty 11.2% 16.6% 19.3% Real Median Household Income (2013)* $55,104 $54,935 $51,810 Real Per Capita Income (2013)* $25,919 $25,021 $27,627 The median household income in LaGrange County dipped by $3,300 between 2003 and 2013 in real dollars (that is, adjusted for inflation), while average income per person rose by $1,700 (in real dollars) over the same time period. The total population in poverty grew by 4.8 percentage points between 2002 and 2013. However, the number of minors in poverty increased by nearly twice that amount. As a result, nearly one in five minors was living in poverty in 2013. *Real median household income is the middle income value in the county. Half of the county’s households fall above this line and half below. Real per capita personal income is the average income per person in the county. section 03 Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE) and U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis – Regional Personal Income Summary

Economy Income and poverty Median household income in LaGrange County generally decreased between 2000 and 2011, but it is now improving. Per capita income has been gradually increasing since 2000. Poverty rates for adults and minors have stabilized since 2011, although the rates remain sizeable. section 03 Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE) and U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis – Regional Personal Income Summary

Economy The fluctuation and decline in real median income experienced between 2000 and 2013 may be tied to employment changes in the county during that time period. High-paying Information and moderate-paying Management industry jobs (yearly earnings of $88,000 and $60,000, respectively) declined, while moderate and low- paying industries, such as Manufacturing ($57,000) and Accommodation & Food Services ($14,000), grew in LaGrange County. Occupations showed the same trend in that high-paying Legal jobs ($36 per hour) and moderate-paying Management and Construction jobs ($15 to $20 per hour) were lost while moderate-paying Production ($16 per hour) and low-paying Food Preparation ($9 per hour) jobs experienced gains. No doubt, the ability of LaGrange County to capture high-paying jobs will depend on the availability of a well-trained and educated workforce, something that may be challenging in light of the smaller percentage of adults in the county with an associate’s degree or higher. Ensuring that a skilled workforce is available to support the key industries in the county will be important to the economic stability of the county. Takeaways Growth in the number of establishments in LaGrange County occurred mainly in businesses having fewer than 10 employees (the self-employed and Stage 1 enterprises), components of the local economy that are often overlooked by local leaders. LaGrange County might consider focusing on economic development efforts that seek to strengthen high-growth Stage 1 and 2 establishments, since they employ several people and capture sizable sales, although these sales have suffered in recent years. Real median income has decreased and poverty has increased in LaGrange County since 2000. While poverty rates for minors and the total population have stabilized since 2011, they remain higher than in 2000. As of 2013, nearly 20 percent of minors were living in poverty, higher than the poverty rate for the population as a whole. section 03

04 labor market Labor force and unemployment Workforce inflow/outflow Commuter shed Labor shed Takeaways 04 labor market

Labor force and unemployment Labor market Labor force and unemployment 2002 2007 2014 Labor Force 16,587 17,028 18,154 Unemployment Rate 4.7% 4.9% 4.5% The labor force in LaGrange County increased by 9.5 percent between 2002 and 2014. This increase may be due to the county’s growing along with the return to the workforce of residents who had given up looking for jobs during the Great Recession and are now gainfully employed. The improved economic climate of the county has resulted in a decline of its unemployment rate. section 04 Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics (2014 Annual Data Release)

Labor market Unemployment rate Unemployment increased dramatically after 2007, peaking at 17.4 percent in 2009. Since that time, the rate has been on a steady decline, dipping to 4.5 percent by 2014. section 04 Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics (2014 Annual Data Release)

Workforce inflow and outflow in 2013 Labor market Workforce inflow and outflow in 2013 LaGrange County has more laborers traveling out of the county for work than into the county for work. Net commuting is negative, with a loss of 4,413 commuters. The resulting situation is that for every 100 employed residents, LaGrange County has 72 jobs. Count Proportion Employed in LaGrange County 11,562 100% Both employed and living in the county 5,657 49% Employed in the county but living outside 5,905 51% Living in LaGrange County 15,975 Both living and employed in the county 35% Living in the county but employed outside 10,318 65% 5,905 10,318 5,657 section 04 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

Commuter shed Labor market Same Work/ Out-Commuters Home A county’s commuter shed is the geographic area to which its resident labor force travels to work. Sixty-five percent of employed residents in LaGrange County commute to jobs located outside of the county. Elkhart County is the biggest destination for residents who work outside of LaGrange County. Thirty-seven percent of out-commuters work in counties adjacent to LaGrange County. However, the second and fifth largest work destinations outside of LaGrange County are the Fort Wayne (Allen County) and the Indianapolis (Marion County) metropolitan areas, respectively. 10,318 5,657 Commuters Proportion Elkhart, IN 3,491 21.9% Allen, IN 1,155 7.2% Noble, IN 906 5.7% Steuben, IN 544 3.4% Marion, IN 513 3.2% section 04 Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

Commuter shed in 2013 Labor market Seventy-five percent of LaGrange County’s working residents are employed either in Allen, Elkhart, LaGrange, Noble or Steuben Counties in Indiana. Another 5 percent commute to Marion County in Indiana or St. Joseph County in Michigan. An additional 5 percent travel to jobs in DeKalb, Kosciusko or Lake Counties in Indiana. Collectively, these 10 counties represent 85 percent of the commuter shed for LaGrange County. section 04 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

Labor shed Labor market Same Work/ In-Commuters Home A county’s labor shed is the geographic area from which it draws employees. Fifty-one percent of individuals working in LaGrange County commute from another county. Thirty-seven percent of in-commuters reside in counties adjacent to LaGrange County, and the two largest sources of workers outside of LaGrange County are the adjacent Elkhart and Noble Counties. The fifth largest source of employees outside of LaGrange County is the Fort Wayne (Allen County) metropolitan area. 5,905 5,657 Commuters Proportion Elkhart, IN 1,584 13.7% Noble, IN 1,119 9.7% St. Joseph, IN 792 6.9% Steuben, IN 498 4.3% Allen, IN 242 2.1% section 04 Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

Labor shed in 2013 Labor market The bulk (75 percent) of LaGrange County’s workforce is drawn from LaGrange, Elkhart or Noble Counties in Indiana. Another 5 percent is drawn from St. Joseph County in Michigan. An additional 5 percent reside in Steuben County in Indiana. Combined, these 5 counties represent 85 percent of LaGrange County’s labor shed. section 04 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

Takeaways Labor market Approximately two-thirds of LaGrange County residents in the workforce are gainfully employed outside of the county. This constitutes a sizeable loss of human talent that may be unavailable to contribute to the social and economic vitality of the county. It may be worthwhile for local leaders and industries to determine the human capital attributes of workers who commute to jobs outside the county. By so doing, they could be positioned to determine how best to reduce the leakage of educated and skilled workers to surrounding counties. Of course, this will require expansion of good paying jobs that will help keep these workers in their home county. In light of the labor shed and commuter shed data showing a strong linkage to surrounding counties for jobs and labor, it may make sense for the county to partner with surrounding counties to pursue economic and workforce development strategies at the regional (multi-county) level. Takeaways The Great Recession that impacted the U.S. economy between 2007 and 2009 took a major toll on LaGrange County’s unemployment rate. While the rate was quite low in 2000, it increased more than sevenfold to 17.4 percent by 2009. Recent figures make it clear that the unemployment rate has improved significantly since 2009. Along with the increase in the population over the past decade or more, the county’s labor force has grown since 2002. This may be a natural increase due to population growth or due to previously discouraged workers in the county reentering the labor market and finding jobs. Despite a larger labor force, the unemployment rate fell slightly between 2002 and 2014 to 4.5 percent. section 04

Notes OTM (On the Map): OTM, a product of LEHD program, is used in the county snapshot report to develop commuting patterns for a geography from two perspectives: place of residence and place of work. At the highly detailed level of census blocks, some of the data are synthetic to maintain confidentiality of the worker. However, for larger regions mapped at the county level, the commuter shed and labor shed data are fairly reasonable. OTM includes jobs for a worker employed in the reference as well as previous quarter. Hence, job counts are based on two consecutive quarters (six months) measured at the “beginning of a quarter.” OTM data can differ from commuting patterns developed from state annual income tax returns, which asks a question about “county of residence” and “county of work” on January 1 of the tax-year. OTM can also differ from American Community Survey data, which is based on a sample survey of the resident population. SAIPE (Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates): SAIPE is a U.S. Census Bureau program that provides annual data estimates of income and poverty statistics at various geographic levels. The estimates are used in the administration of federal and state assistance programs. SAIPE utilizes statistical models to estimate data from sample surveys, census enumerations, and administrative records. LAUS (Local Area Unemployment Statistics): LAUS is a U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) program that provides monthly and annual labor force, employment and unemployment data by place of residence at various geographic levels. LAUS utilizes statistical models to estimate data values based on household surveys and employer reports. These estimates are updated annually. Annual county- level LAUS estimates do not include seasonal adjustments. LEHD (Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics): LEHD is a partnership between U.S. Census Bureau and State Department of Workforce Development (DWD) to provide labor market and journey to work data at various geographic levels. LEHD uses Unemployment Insurance earnings data and Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages from DWDs and census administrative records related to individuals and businesses. NETS (National Establishment Time Series): NETS is an establishment-level database, not a company-level database. This means that each entry is a different physical location, and company-level information must be created by adding the separate establishment components.

Report Contributors This report was prepared by the Purdue Center for Regional Development in partnership with Purdue University Extension. Report Authors Elizabeth Dobis Bo Beaulieu, Ph.D. Data Analysis Indraneel Kumar, Ph.D. Ayoung Kim Report Design Tyler Wright It is the policy of the Purdue University Cooperative Extension Service that all persons have equal opportunity and access to its educational programs, services, activities, and facilities without regard to race, religion, color, sex, age, national origin or ancestry, marital status, parental status, sexual orientation, disability or status as a veteran. Purdue University is an Affirmative Action institution. This material may be available in alternative formats.

FOR MORE INFORMATION Please contact Steven Engleking Ag and Natural Resources and Community Development Extension Educator 260-499-6334 englekin@purdue.edu PCRD 1341 Northwestern Avenue West Lafayette, IN 47906 Purdue University 765-494-7273 pcrd@purdue.edu Purdue Extension Community Development (CD) . . . works to strengthen the capacity of local leaders, residents and organizations to work together to develop and sustain strong, vibrant communities. OR Purdue Center for Regional Development (PCRD) . . . seeks to pioneer new ideas and strategies that contribute to regional collaboration, innovation and prosperity.