1. DATA SNAPSHOT
Clinton County
Data SnapShot Series 1.0 March 2015

2. 01 03 02 04 Table of contents Introduction Economy Demography
Labor Market

3. 01
introduction
Purpose
About Clinton County

4. Introduction
Purpose
This document provides information and data about Clinton 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

5. About Clinton County Introduction County Background Established 1830
Seat
Frankfort
Area
405 sq. mi.
Neighboring
Counties
Carroll, IN
Howard, IN
Tipton, IN
Hamilton, IN
Montgomery, IN
Tippecanoe, IN
section 01

6. 02 demography Population change Population pyramids Race Ethnicity
Educational attainment
Takeaways 02
demography

7. Population change 2020 2013 2010 2000 Demography
Total population projections
33,866
33,224
32,784
2020
2013
2010
2000
The total population is projected to decrease by less than 1 percent between 2013 and
32,916
The total population of Clinton County decreased by 3 percent between 2000 and The major contributor to the decline was net domestic migration, with a net population loss of over 3,444 people. Domestic migration examines the number of residents who moved out of the county minus the number who moved into the county from other counties in Indiana or other U.S. states.
Natural increase (the difference between the number of births versus deaths) shows that births outpaced deaths by nearly 2,048 people. On the other hand, international migration had a net increase of over 1,909 individuals, indicating that the county experienced an influx of new people from outside the U.S.
Components of Population Change,
Total Change
360*
Natural Increase
2,048
International Migration
1,909
Domestic Migration
-3,444
*Components of population extracted from Components of Population Change 2010 (CO-EST-2010) and Components of Population Change (PEPCOMP 2013). Estimation residuals are leading to a positive total change in total population.
section 02
Sources: STATSIndiana, U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census, 2010 Decennial Census, 2012 Estimates, Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change

8. Demography
Population pyramids Population pyramids are visual representations of the age distribution of the population by gender.
2000
2013
Male
Female
Male
Female
The male to female ratio of the population slightly decreased between 2000 and 2013, indicating that a larger share of the population is now made up of females. In addition, the distribution of people across the various age categories over the two time periods has changed as well.
The percent of people under 50 years old decreased among males and females over the period. Noticeable declines have occurred among people of prime working age—those 20 to 29, 30 to 39 and 40 to 49 years of age. Furthermore, about 35 percent of the population is now 50 and over, up from 28 percent in 2000.
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates

9. Demography
Race
The percentage of the population that is non-White in Clinton County did not change dramatically between 2000 and As such, the racial make-up of the county remains largely Caucasian (white). While every race, other than White, experienced a numerical increase between 2000 and 2013, the Asian population remained basically stable while the Mixed Descent category increased the most, expanding from 0.4 percent to 0.8 percent of the total population between 2000 and 2013.
section 02
Race Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 and 2013 Annual Population Estimates

10. 7% 14% Ethnicity Demography
Hispanics
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 2,478 residing in Clinton County in This figure expanded to 4,783 by 2013, a 93 percent increase.
As a result, Hispanics now represent 14 percent of the population in the county (versus around 7 percent in 2000). 7%
Hispanics
14%
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 and 2013 Annual Population Estimates

11. Educational attainment
Demography
Educational attainment
Educational attainment for adults 25 years old and over is increasing, but at a slow rate.
The proportion of adults (25 years of age and older) with a high school education or more improved from 80 percent in 2000 to 85 percent by 2013.
The percent with less than a high school education fell by 5 percentage points between 2000 and 2013 (from 20 percent to 15 percent). On the other hand, those with some college or an associate’s degree grew by a few percentage points.
The number of adults with a bachelor’s degree or more grew by 3 percentage points, from 10 percent in 2000 to 13 percent in 2013, still well behind the statewide figure of over 23 percent.
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 ACS

12. Demography
Takeaways
The population of Clinton County is expected to decrease over the next few years, and if past trends hold, that decrease will be largely due to out-migration. Were it not for natural increase or the influx of international migrants into Clinton County, the county’s total population loss would have been much larger over the past decade or more.
With the changing population has come shifts in the age structure of the county. Since 2000, the county has experienced a relative growth of older residents (50 years of age or older), Worthy of attention is the falling percentage of people in the county of prime working age, individuals in the 20 to 29, 30 to 39 and 40 to 49 age groupings.
While the racial make-up of the county remains largely Caucasian (i.e., white), it has become more ethnically diverse as a result of the expansion of its Hispanic population – doubling from 7 percent to 14 percent of the population between 2000 and It is likely that the Hispanic population will continue to expand its presence in the coming years.
The educational attainment of the county’s adult population (25 and over) has improved with more people completing a four-year college education or more. However, the percent of people with only a high school education remains quite sizable at 47 percent, suggesting that securing jobs that require high skilled, higher educated workers may be difficult to achieve in the near future.
section 02

13. 03 economy Establishments Industries Occupations Income and poverty
Takeaways 03
economy

14. 0 1 3 4 Establishments Definition of Company Stages Economy
The number of establishments in Clinton County grew by 36 percent between 2000 and *
The growth of establishments was due to natural change, with 1,930 establishments being launched in the county between 2000 and 2011, while 1,310 establishments closed during this same time period. The net migration of establishments was negative (-16), suggesting that more establishments moved out of than moved into the county during this time period. All told, the county experienced a net gain of 604 establishments.
An establishment is a physical business location. Branches, standalones and headquarters are all considered types of establishments.
Definition of Company Stages
Self-employed
2-9 employees
Components of Change for Establishments
Total Change ( )
604
Natural Change (births minus deaths)
620
Net Migration
-16 3
10-99
employees
employees 4
500+
employees
*2012 data contains firm-births up to 2011 only
section 03
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database

15. Number of establishments by stage/ employment category
Economy
Number of establishments by stage/ employment category
2000
2011
Stage
Establishments
Proportion
Stage 0
541
32.6%
815
36%
Stage 1
910
54.8%
1 ,247
55%
Stage 2
188
11.3%
182 8%
Stage 3 20
1.2% 17
0.8%
Stage 4 2
0.1% 4*
0.2%
Total
1,661
100%
2,265
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.
*Reference USA database has only two stage 4 companies, as compared to four stage 4 companies in NETS. The two companies in Reference USA are contained in the NETS database.
section 03
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database

16. Number of jobs by stage/employment category
Economy
Number of jobs by stage/employment category
2000
2011
Stage
Jobs
Proportion
Stage 0
541 4%
815
5.3%
Stage 1
3,187
23.4%
3,857
24.9%
Stage 2
4,676
34.3%
5,015
32.4%
Stage 3
3,936
28.9%
3,361
21.7%
Stage 4
1,300
9.5%
2,420
15.6%
Total
13,640
100%
15,468
section 03
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database

17. Number of sales by stage/employment category
Economy
Number of sales by stage/employment category
2000
2011
Stage
Sales
Proportion
Stage 0
$64,624,980
3.3%
$55,500,028
Stage 1
$403,520,821
20.8%
$312,815,928
18.5%
Stage 2
$515,323,685
26.6%
$431,034,445
25.5%
Stage 3
$657,687,590
34.0%
$581,511,789
34.5%
Stage 4
$294,368,674
15.2%
$306,999,752
18.2%
Total
$ 1,935,525,753
100%
$1,687,861,944
section 03
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database

18. Economy
Top five industries in 2013
63 percent of jobs are tied to one of the top five industries in Clinton County.
Manufacturing is the largest industry sector (3,698 jobs) followed by Government (1,715 jobs), Health Care and Social Assistance (1,273 jobs) and Retail Trade (1,239 jobs).
Other services is the smallest of the top industry sectors with 858 people employed in this industry, a sector that also experienced a 13 percent decline between 2002 and 2013.
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – Class of Worker

19. Industry distribution and change
Economy
Industry distribution and change
NAICS Code
Description
Jobs 2002
Jobs 2013
Change ( )
% Change ( )
Average Total Earnings 2013 11
Crop and Animal Production
755
857
102
14%
$31,318 21
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 19 26 7
37%
$390,834 22
Utilities
<10
---- 23
Construction
733
722
-12
-2%
$40,680 31
Manufacturing
4,361
3,689
-673
-15%
$57,634 42
Wholesale Trade
248
268 20 8%
$58,874 44
Retail Trade
1,374
1,239
-141
-10%
$23,409 48
Transportation and Warehousing
259
505
246
95%
$61,088 51
Information
140 94
-46
-33%
$45,468 52
Finance and Insurance
371
416
12%
$53,514 53
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
271
373
121
48%
$21,941 54
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
260
267 4%
$33,908 55
Management of Companies and Enterprises 14 10 -3
-23% 56
Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services
440
580
32%
$22,671 61
Educational Services 37 5
$16,960 62
Health Care and Social Assistance
1,347
1,273
-74
-5%
$41,575 71
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
114
128
$17,706 72
Accommodation and Food Services
746
796 49 7%
$13,815 81
Other Services (except Public Administration)
963
858
-131
-13%
$19,466 90
Government
1,689
1,715 2%
$44,322 99
Unclassified Industry 0%
All
Total
14,148
13,859
-301
$41,252
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – Class of Worker

20. Industry distribution and change
Economy
Industry distribution and change
Employment Growth
Employment Declines
Numerical job changes in the top five industry sectors,
Transportation & Warehousing (+246)
Administrative & Waste Management (+140)
Manufacturing (-673)
Retail Trade (-141)
The largest employment gains (in percent) in Clinton County occurred in:
Transportation and Warehousing (+95 percent)
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing (+48 percent)
The largest employment losses (in percent) occurred in:
Information (- 33 percent)
Management of Companies and Industries (-23 percent)
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – Class of Worker

21. Top five occupations in 2013
Economy
Top five occupations in 2013
The top five occupations in Clinton County represent 56 percent of all jobs.
Production and Sales and Related are the occupations with the largest number of workers, representing 17 percent and 11 percent of the workforce, respectively.
Management occupations is the smallest of the top five occupations in the county (8 percent of jobs).
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – Class of Worker

22. Occupation distribution and change
Economy
Occupation distribution and change
SOC
Description
Jobs 2002
Jobs 2013
Change
( )
% Change ( )
Hourly Earnings 2013 11
Management
1,124
1,136 12 1%
$23.09 13
Business and Financial Operations
353
351 -2
-1%
$28.47 15
Computer and Mathematical
114 74
-40
-35%
$24.14 17
Architecture and Engineering
187
112
-75
-40%
$26.98 19
Life, Physical and Social Science 45 43
-4%
$25.06 21
Community and Social Service
158
133
-25
-16%
$19.37 23
Legal 47 39 -8
-17%
$35.16 25
Education, Training and Library
654
684 30 5%
$18.31 27
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports and Media
245
246 1 0%
$16.10 29
Health Care Practitioners and Technical
467
482 3%
$26.33 31
Health Care Support
380
410 8%
$11.69 33
Protective Service
190
178
-12
-6%
$17.19 35
Food Preparation and Serving Related
937
961 24
$9.11 37
Building and Grounds Cleaning Maintenance
500
401
-99
-20%
$11.13
Personal Care and Service
512
444
-68
-13%
$10.05 41
Sales and Related
1,437
1,459 22 2%
$13.98
Office and Administrative Support
1,572
1,413
-159
-10%
$15.26
Farming, Fishing and Forestry
150
25%
$12.36
Construction and Extraction
602
$16.24 49
Installation, Maintenance and Repair
573
547
-26
-5%
$18.50 51
Production
2,472
2,324
-148
$15.65 53
Transportation and Material Moving
1,273
1,417
144
11%
$15.66 55
Military
107 -5
$18.99 99
Unclassified 57
108
89%
$11.01
All
Total
14,160
13,859
-301
-2%
$16.36
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – Class of Worker

23. Occupation distribution and change
Economy
Occupation distribution and change
The largest percentage gains in jobs in Clinton County occurred in:
Unclassified Occupation (+89 percent)
Farming, Fishing and Forestry Occupations (+25 percent)
The largest percentage loss in employment occurred in:
Architecture and Engineering (-40 percent)
Computer and Mathematical occupations (-35 percent)
Numerical changes in the top five occupations,
Transportation & Material Moving (+144)
Unclassified (+51)
Farming, Fishing & Forestry (+37)
Office & Administrative (-159)
Production
(-148)
Employment Increase
Employment Decrease
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – Class of Worker

24. Income and poverty Economy
The median income for households in Clinton County dipped by $7,197 between and 2013 in real dollars (that is, adjusted for inflation).
Both the total population in poverty and the number of minors living in poverty have increased by sizable percentages since In fact, the proportion of minors in poverty expanded by nearly 10 percent from to However, child poverty has improved since 2011 (see next page).
The growth in poverty could be linked to a number of factors, including the remnants of the Great Recession, the large number of working adults with lower levels of education, and the loss of higher paying jobs in the manufacturing sector.
2000
2006
2013
Total Population in Poverty
8.3%
11.9%
14.4%
Minors (up to age 17) in Poverty
11.4%
16.3%
21%
Real Median Income (2013 US$)
$ 54,476
$ 50,802
$ 47,279
section 03
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE)

25. Economy
Income and poverty Median income in Clinton County has decreased in recent years, while poverty has shown recent improvements, although still higher than in 2000.
section 03
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE)

26. Economy
Takeaways
The greatest growth in establishments in Clinton County occurred in businesses having fewer than 10 employees. So, focusing on the needs of the self-employed (Stage 0) and Stage 1 establishments (those with 2 to 9 employees) may be worth considering. At the same time, Stage 2 firms, while experiencing a small decline in the number of establishments over the to 2011 time period, added nearly 340 jobs. So, attending to the growth possibilities of Stage 2 establishments would be a smart move. Of course, the impressive job gains among Stage 4 establishments in the county is worthy of note; they added over 1,110 jobs to the County’s economy between 2000 and 2011.
In sum, it is important for Clinton County to continue pursuing a balanced economic development portfolio. This includes a concerted effort to promote the growth of Stage 1 and 2 companies in the area.
Among the top five industries in Clinton County, only government experienced growth between 2002 and 2013, a modest 2 percent increase. While median income decreased over the past decade, the percentage of people in poverty grew, although recent data suggest that poverty rates for both adults and children have experienced modest declines since Promoting job growth for occupations requiring educated workers could be a good way to retain working adults with higher levels of educational attainment. Moreover, it would help boost the median income of individuals in the county. In light of the number of people falling below the poverty line, it will be important to target services to these individuals, especially those with children. Efforts to expand training and work opportunities for those able to move into the workforce will be something worth considering.
section 03

27. 04 labor market Labor force and unemployment Commuteshed Laborshed
Takeaways

28. Labor force and unemployment
Labor market
Labor force and unemployment
2002
2007
2013
Labor Force
16,642
16,887
16,453
Unemployment Rate
4.7%
4.5%
7.1%
The unemployment rate in Clinton County expanded from 4.7 percent in to 7.1 percent in 2013.
Despite the uptick in the unemployment between 2002 and 2013, the actual number of persons in the labor force did not change dramatically over the 2002 to time period.
section 04
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics

29. Labor market
Unemployment rate The unemployment rate in Clinton County peaked at 10.8 percent in 2009 and has declined since that time.
section 04
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics

30. Commuteshed 2011 Labor market Out-Commuters Same Work/ Home
A county’s commuteshed is the geographic area to which its resident work force travels to work.
A large portion of employed residents in Clinton County commute to jobs located outside of Clinton County (over 7,100 workers).
The top destination counties for Clinton County residents who work outside of the county are Tippecanoe County, Marion County and Boone County, Indiana.
Just under 5,000 people both work and live in Clinton county.
7,142
4,961
Counties
Commuters
Proportion
Clinton
4,961
41%
Tippecanoe
2,649
21.9%
Marion
971
8.0%
Boone
914
7.6%
Hamilton
333
2.8%
Carrol
280
2.3%
All Other Counties
1,995
16.5%
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

31. Commuteshed 2011 Labor market
Eighty percent of Clinton County’s working residents are employed in Clinton, Tippecanoe, Boone or Marion Counties. Another 5 percent commute to Carrol and Hamilton Counties, while an additional 5 percent travel as far as Lake and Allen Counties.
Collectively, these counties represent 90 percent of the commuteshed (or the journey to work) characteristics of Clinton County’s residents in the workforce.
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

32. Laborshed 2011 Labor market In-Commuters Same Work/ Home
A county’s laborshed is the geographic area from which it draws employees.
Nearly 5,000 individuals working in Clinton County commute from other counties. Tippecanoe County and Howard County are the biggest sources of outside labor for Clinton County.
Approximately half of the labor force needs of Clinton County are being met by employees who live outside of the county. The most significant providers of outside workers are Tippecanoe and Howard Counties. Marion and Boone Counties contribute just over 3 percent of the workforce needs to Clinton County.
4,958
4,961
Counties
Commuters
Proportion
Clinton
4,961
50%
Tippecanoe
941
9.50%
Howard
435
4.40%
Carrol
377
3.80%
Marion
318
3.20%
Boone
311
3.10%
All Other Counties
2,576
25.9%
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

33. Laborshed 2011 Labor market
The bulk (80 percent) of Clinton County’s workforce is drawn from the local workforce or from surrounding counties (shown in red on the map). Another 5 percent are drawn from Jasper, White, Cass, Tipton and Hendricks Counties (in yellow). An additional 5 percent of the labor force travel to Clinton County for work from 11 additional counties in Indiana (in green).
Combined, some 25 counties represent 90 percent of Clinton County’s laborshed.
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

34. Takeaways Labor market
Clinton County’s unemployment rate swelled between 2000 and 2009 but has since declined. The major uptick in unemployment was linked, in no small way, to the economic challenges associated with the Great Recession. With the improving economic forces in the nation and state of Indiana, there is every reason to believe that unemployment rate will continue to improve in the county.
Over 7,100 labor members who live in Clinton County are employed outside of the county, while approximately 5,000 workers from outside the county work in Clinton County. In essence, this means that the county is experiencing a net loss of over 2,100 workers.
Determining the human capital attributes of workers who commute to jobs outside the county
could be insightful. It could provide the information needed to determine how best to reduce the leakage of educated and skilled workers to surrounding counties.
In light of the strong economic connection of Clinton County to surrounding counties, it may make sense to explore regional economic development strategies that build on the economic assets of the entire region.
Given the decline in the county’s median income, finding ways to improve the skills of the workforce could be critical. The recent expansion of Ivy Tech in the county could be an important conduit for expanding workforce development opportunities for current and future labor force participants.
section 04

35. Report Contributors This report was prepared by the Purdue Center for Regional Development in partnership with Purdue University Extension.
Report Authors
Elizabeth Dobis
Francisco Scott
Bo Beaulieu, Ph.D.
Data Analysis
Indraneel Kumar, Ph.D.
Ayoung Kim
Michael Wilcox. Ph.D.
Report Design
Tyler Wright
Adeline Jackson
section 04

36. FOR MORE INFORMATION
Please contact
Melinda Grismer
County Extension Director & Community Development Educator
PCRD
Mann Hall, Suite 266
Purdue University
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.