1. DATA SNAPSHOT
Washington County
Data SnapShot Series 1.1 February 2016

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

3. 01
introduction
Purpose
About Washington County

4. Introduction
Purpose
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.
This document provides information and data about Washington 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.
section 01

5. About Washington County
Introduction
About Washington County
County Background
Established
1814
County
Seat
Salem
Area
517 sq. mi.
Neighboring
Counties
Clark, IN
Crawford, IN
Floyd, IN
Harrison, IN
Jackson, IN
Lawrence, IN
Orange, IN
Scott, IN
Metropolitan Status
Metropolitan
section 01

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

7. Population change 2000 2010 2014 2020 Total population projections
Demography
Population change
Total population projections
The total population is projected to increase by 4 percent between and 2020.
2000
2010
2014
2020
The county’s total population increased by 2 percent between 2000 and Natural increase (births minus deaths over that span of time) was the major contributor to that expansion, with a gain of more than 800 persons.
International migration also experienced a net growth of 89 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 net loss of 688 individuals in Washington County between 2000 and 2014.
Components of Population Change,
Total Change
51*
Natural Increase
829
International Migration 89
Domestic Migration
-688
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

8. Demography
Population pyramids Population pyramids are visual representations of the age distribution of the population by gender.
2000
2014
Male
Female
Male
Female
Approximately half of the population was female in 2000 (13,603 people) and that percentage remained about the same in 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 12.8 % to 17.8% for males and from 15.0% to 19.4% for females between 2000 and Individuals of prime working age (20 to 49) dipped from 42.9% to 36.8% of the population. However, residents under 20 years of age declined from 29.1% to 26.1% of the total population over the same time period.
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2014 Annual Population Estimates

9. Demography
Race
2000
The proportion of non-White residents in Washington County doubled between 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, people of Two or More Races (+103) gained the most.
The Black population had the largest percentage growth (+225), but it remains a small part of the overall population. The White population increased by 674 residents between 2000 and , experiencing the smallest percentage gain (+2 percent).
Despite the growth of the non-White population, in 2014 White residents still represented 98 percent of the county’s total population.
2014
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2014 Annual Population Estimates

10. 1% 2% 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 200 Hispanics residing in Washington County in This figure expanded to 388 by , a 94 percent increase.
Due to this numeric increase, the proportion of Hispanics in the population now hovers around the 2 percent mark. 1%
Hispanics 2%
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2014 Annual Population Estimates

11. Educational attainment
Demography
Educational attainment
Washington County had a 5 percentage points increase in the number of adults (25 and older) with an associate’s degree or higher between 2000 and 2014.
The proportion of adults 25 years of age and older with a high school education or more improved from 75 percent in 2000 to 81 percent by Those with a high school degree only grew slightly from 44 percent in to 45 percent in 2014.
Adults with a college degree increased from 14 percent in 2000 to 19 percent in This was due to a 3 percentage points increase in the proportion of residents with associate’s degrees (4 percent versus 7 percent), while the proportion of adults with at least a bachelor's degree increased from 10 to 12 percent. .
2000
2014
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2014 American Community Survey (ACS)

12. Demography
Takeaways
The population of Washington 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). The net loss of population due to domestic migration is likely to remain an issue in the county.
Washington County’s age structure makes clear that a larger share of residents is getting older. That is, the number of persons 50 years of age or older has increased by over 5 percentage points between 2000 and 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 experienced a declined. As such, the challenge for the county is how to invest in programs and services that can meet the needs of a growing senior population. At the same time, strategies for retaining people of prime working age are matters deserving of serious attention as well.
The educational attainment of adults 25 and over has improved since 2000, but the percentage of adults with a high school education only (45 percent) or less (19 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 nearly one-fifth of adult residents of the county have an associate’s, bachelor’s or higher degree, this figure is 13 percentage points below the figure for the state of Indiana as a whole in 2014.
Washington 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 businesses and industries in the county and region may be worth exploring.
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 Washington County increased by 36 percent from 2000 to 2013.
The rapid growth of establishments was due largely to natural change. Between 2000 and , 2,214 establishments were launched in the county, while 1,738 closed, resulting in a gain of establishments. There was also a small loss of 21 establishments due to net migration.
An establishment is a physical business location. Branches, standalones and headquarters are all considered types of establishments.
Definition of Company Stages
Components of Change for Establishments
Total Change ( )
455
Natural Change (births minus deaths)
476
Net Migration
-21
Self-employed
2-9 employees 3
10-99
employees
employees 4
500+
employees
section 03
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – youreconomy.org

15. Number of establishments by stage/employment category
Economy
Number of establishments by stage/employment category
2000
2013
Stage
Establishments
Proportion
Stage 0
443
35%
515
30%
Stage 1
697
55%
1,061
61%
Stage 2
122
10%
141 8%
Stage 3 6 0% 14 1%
Stage 4 2 1
Total
1,270
100%
1,732
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 no Stage 4 firm in 2011, whereas NETS shows one Stage 4 firm. Additional information is available on the next slide.
section 03
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – youreconomy.org

16. Top five employers in 2015 Economy Establishment Stage1.
Kimball Office*
Stage 3 2.
Peerless Gear* 3.
GKN Sinter Metals 4.
St. Vincent Salem Hospital 5.
Net Shape Technologies, Inc.
The top five employers produce regional, national and global goods and services.
Kimball Office and Peerless Gear in Salem are the largest establishment-level employers in Washington County. Both companies manufacture goods, namely, office furniture and transmissions, respectively.
Other top employers are GKN Sinter Metals and Net Shape Technologies, who manufacture powder metal parts that are sold throughout the nation and world. St. Vincent Hospital is a regional medical provider.
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.
*Kimball Office and Peerless Gear are listed as having the same number of employees and are, therefore, listed in alphabetical order.
section 03
Source: ReferenceUSA (Infogroup)

17. Number of jobs by stage/employment category
Economy
Number of jobs by stage/employment category
2000
2013
Stage
Jobs*
Proportion
Stage 0
443 5%
515
Stage 1
2,326
28%
3,271
34%
Stage 2
3,143
38%
3,385
35%
Stage 3
1,437
17%
1,958
20%
Stage 4
1,000
12%
500
Total
8,349
100%
9,629
section 03
*Includes both full-time and part-time jobs
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – youreconomy.org

18. Amount of sales (2013 dollars) by stage/employment category
Economy
Amount of sales (2013 dollars) by stage/employment category
2000
2013
Stage
Sales
Proportion
Stage 0
$64,539,888 7%
$37,235,649 5%
Stage 1
$279,625,022
30%
$219,545,517
32%
Stage 2
$291,747,411
31%
$161,026,229
23%
Stage 3
$209,611,920
22%
$233,967,600
34%
Stage 4
$96,495,231
10%
$42,500,000 6%
Total
$942,019,472
100%
$694,274,995
section 03
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – youreconomy.org

19. Economy
Top five industries in 2014
62.0 percent of jobs are tied to one of the top five industries in Washington County.
Manufacturing is the largest industry sector (1,736 jobs). Health Care & Social Assistance is the smallest of the top industry sectors with 832 jobs.
Of the top five industries in Washington County, Health Care & Social Assistance (+63.9 percent) and Retail Trade ( percent) gained jobs between and Of the remaining top five industries, Manufacturing lost the most, with a 21.1 percent decrease in jobs.
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

20. Industry distribution and change
Economy
Industry distribution and change
NAICS Code
Description
Jobs 2002
Jobs
2014
Change ( )
% Change ( )
Average Total Earnings 2014 11
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting
1,090
902
-188
-17%
$24,967 21
Mining, Quarrying, & Oil & Gas Extraction 14 16 2
15%
$156,472 22
Utilities 17 -3
$77,457 23
Construction
787
737
-50
-6%
$27,271
31-33
Manufacturing
2,200
1,736
-464
-21%
$50,415 42
Wholesale Trade
183
128
-55
-30%
$37,671
44-45
Retail Trade
1,043
1,069 26 2%
$25,442
48-49
Transportation & Warehousing
266
225
-41
-15%
$34,503 51
Information
121 0%
$34,609 52
Finance & Insurance
217
305 88
41%
$47,604 53
Real Estate & Rental & Leasing
185
279 94
51%
$23,539 54
Professional, Scientific & Technical Services
267
221
-46
$26,230 55
Management of Companies and Enterprises
<10 - 56
Administrative & Waste Management
216
23%
$18,007 61
Educational Services (Private) 19 40
108%
$15,728 62
Health Care & Social Assistance
507
832
325
64%
$34,372 71
Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 87
102 15
17%
$10,991 72
Accommodation and Food Services
516
526 10
$16,361 81
Other Services (except Public Administration)
492
578 86
18%
$13,770 90
Government
1,480
1,285
-195
-13%
$43,516 99
Unclassified Industry $0
All
Total
9,721
9,389
-332
-3%
$33,296
section 03
Note: Average total earnings include wages, salaries, supplements and earnings from investments and proprietorships. Industries and occupations with a value of <10 have insufficient data for change and earnings calculations.
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

21. Industry distribution and change
Economy
Industry distribution and change
The largest percentage gains in employment in Washington County occurred in:
Educational Services, private ( percent)
Health Care & Social Assistance (+63.9 percent)
The largest percentage losses in employment occurred in:
Wholesale Trade (-30.2 percent)
Manufacturing (-21.1 percent)
Employment Increase
Employment Decrease
Industries with the largest gains and losses in employment numbers between 2002 & 2014:
Health Care & Social Assistance (+325)
Real Estate & Leasing (+94)
Manufacturing (-464)
Government (-195)
Agriculture, Forestry & Fishing (-188)
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

22. Top five occupations in 2014
Economy
Top five occupations in 2014
The top five occupations in Washington County represent percent of all jobs.
Management (1,193 jobs) is the top occupation classification in Washington County. Construction & Extraction is the smallest of the top five occupations with jobs.
All five top occupations in Washington County, with the exception of Sales & Related occupations (+6.6 percent), had a decline in jobs between 2002 and Production occupations lost the largest proportion (-24.9 percent), while Construction & Extraction occupations lost the least with a decline of 6.0 percent.
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

23. Occupation distribution and change
Economy
Occupation distribution and change
SOC
Description
Jobs 2002
Jobs 2014
Change ( )
% Change ( )
Hourly Earnings 2014 11
Management
1,338
1,193
-145
-11%
$17.08 13
Business & Financial Operations
278
263
-15
-5%
$23.67 15
Computer & Mathematical 75 59
-16
-21%
$26.25 17
Architecture & Engineering
111
109 -2
-2%
$29.54 19
Life, Physical & Social Science 22 25 3
14%
$22.45 21
Community & Social Service 79 98
24%
$18.37 23
Legal 41 0%
$27.23
Education, Training & Library
524
590 66
13%
$22.44 27
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports & Media
219
221 2 1%
$14.41 29
Health Care Practitioners & Technical
289
319 30
10%
$28.45 31
Health Care Support
178
231 53
30%
$11.18 33
Protective Service
125
133 8 6%
$15.86 35
Food Preparation & Serving Related
559
596 37 7%
$9.29
Building & Grounds Cleaning Maintenance
267
336 69
26%
$9.42 39
Personal Care & Service
323
411 88
27%
$9.00
Sales & Related
999
1,065
$12.85 43
Office & Administrative Support
931
810
-121
-13%
$14.44 45
Farming, Fishing & Forestry
124
-26
$11.37 47
Construction & Extraction
667
627
-40
-6%
$14.97 49
Installation, Maintenance & Repair
349
335
-14
-4%
$17.06 51
Production
1,413
1,061
-352
-25%
$15.83
Transportation & Material Moving
669
611
-58
-9%
$14.52 55
Military 91 90 -1
-1%
$16.92 99
Unclassified 50 70 20
40%
$11.47
All
Total
9,721
9,389
-332
-3%
$15.66
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

24. Occupation distribution and change
Economy
Occupation distribution and change
The largest percentage gains in employment in Washington County occurred in:*
Health Care Support (+29.7 percent)
Personal Care & Service (+27.2%)
The largest percentage loss in employment occurred in:
Production (-24.9 percent)
Computer & Mathematical (-21.3 percent)
Farming, Fishing & Forestry (-20.9 percent)
Occupations with the largest gains and losses in employment numbers between 2002 & 2014:
Personal Care & Service (+88)
Building & Maintenance
(+69)
Production (-352)
Management (-145)
Office & Administrative Support (-121)
Employment Increase
Employment Decrease
* Unclassified occupations was the category with the largest percentage gains in the county with a 39.6 percent increase.
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

25. Income and poverty Economy 2002 2007 2014
Total Population in Poverty
10.4%
14.7%
16.2%
Minors (up to age 17) in Poverty
12.9%
19.7%
25.0%
Real Median Household Income (2014)*
$47,091
$42,142
$43,573
Real Per Capita Income (2014)*
$28,784
$31,186
$33,352
The median household income in Washington County dipped by $3,500 between 2002 and in real dollars (that is, adjusted for inflation), while average income per person rose by $4,600 (in real dollars) over the same time period.
The total population in poverty grew by 5.8 percentage points between and However, the number of minors in poverty increased by more than twice that amount. As a result, one in four minors was living in poverty in
*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

26. Economy
Income and poverty Median household income in Washington County generally decreased between 2000 and 2011 but has been improving somewhat since Per capita income has been gradually increasing since Recent data suggest that poverty rates for adults and minors have remained stubbornly high relative to the rates during the 2000 to 2002 time period.
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

27. Economy
The fluctuation and decline in real median income experienced between 2000 and 2014 may be tied to employment changes in the county during that time period. Moderate-paying Manufacturing and Government industry jobs (yearly earnings of $50,000 and $44,000, respectively) declined, while mid-to-low-paying industries, such as Health Care & Social Assistance ($34,000), grew in Washington County. Occupations showed the same trend in that moderate-paying Management, Production, and Office & Administration jobs ($14 to $17 per hour) were lost while low-paying Personal Care & Service ($9 per hour) jobs experienced gains. No doubt, the ability of Washington 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 both the county and the region will be important to the economic stability of the area.
Takeaways
Impressive growth in the number of establishments in Washington County occurred in businesses with fewer than 10 employees (the self-employed and Stage 1 enterprises), components of the local economy that are often overlooked by local leaders.
Washington County might consider focusing on economic development that seeks to strengthen high-growth Stage 1 and 2 establishments, since they employ several people and capture sizable sales, although sales have suffered in recent years. Stage 3 establishments have also been an area of employment and sales growth in the county.
Real median income has decreased, while per capita income has increased in Washington County since Poverty rates have declined since but remain higher than in 2000.
section 03

28. 04 labor market Labor force and unemployment Workforce inflow/outflow
Commuter shed
Labor shed
Takeaways 04
labor
market

29. Labor force and unemployment
Labor market
Labor force and unemployment
The labor force in Washington County decreased by 4.8 percent between and 2014.
This decline may be due, in part, to the increasing share of the county’s residents that moved into the 60 years of age or older age cohort between 2002 and At the same time, the county experienced an uptick in the number of people who were unemployed and may have, at some point, been discouraged workers. As a result, they may have exited the labor force, reducing its size.
2002
2007
2014
Labor Force
14,047
14,011
13,369
Unemployment Rate
5.6%
5.2%
6.6%
section 04
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics (2014 Annual Data Release)

30. Labor market
Unemployment rate Unemployment increased dramatically after 2007, peaking at 12.2 percent in Since that time, the rate has been on a steady decline, dipping to 6.6 percent by 2014.
section 04
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics (2014 Annual Data Release)

31. Workforce inflow and outflow in 2013
Labor market
Workforce inflow and outflow in 2013
Count
Proportion
Employed in Washington County
5,422
100%
Both employed and living in the county
3,308
61%
Employed in the county but living outside
2,114
39%
Living in Washington County
13,929
Both living and employed in the county
24%
Living in the county but employed outside
10,621
76%
Washington 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 8,507 commuters. The resulting situation is that for every 100 employed residents, Washington County has 39 jobs.
2,114
10,621
3,308
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

32. 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.
Seventy-six percent of employed residents in Washington County commute to jobs located outside of the county. The Louisville metropolitan area (Clark and Floyd Counties, Indiana, and Jefferson County, Kentucky) is the biggest destination for residents who work outside of Washington County.
Thirty-three percent of out-commuters work in counties adjacent to Washington County. While the top three largest work destinations outside of Washington County are in the Louisville metropolitan area, the fourth largest work destination is the Indianapolis (Marion County, Indiana) metropolitan area.
10,621
3,308
County
Commuters
Proportion
Clark, IN
1,470
10.6%
Floyd, IN
1,232
8.8%
Jefferson, KY
1,149
8.2%
Marion, IN
632
4.5%
Jackson, IN
462
3.3%
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

33. Commuter shed in 2013 Labor market
Sixty-five percent of Washington County’s working residents are employed either in Clark, Floyd, Jackson, Marion, Orange, Scott or Washington Counties in Indiana or Jefferson County in Kentucky. Another 5 percent commute to Harrison or Vanderburgh Counties in Indiana. An additional 5 percent travel to jobs in Allen, Dubois, Lawrence or Monroe Counties in Indiana.
Collectively, these 14 counties represent 75 percent of the commuter shed for Washington County.
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

34. Labor shed Labor market Same Work/ In-Commuters Home
A county’s labor shed is the geographic area from which it draws employees.
Thirty-nine percent of individuals working in Washington County commute from another county.
Twenty-four percent of in-commuters reside in counties adjacent to Washington County. The top eight sources of workers outside of the county are adjacent counties, four of which (Clark, Floyd, Harrison and Scott Counties in Indiana) are part of the Louisville metropolitan area.
2,114
3,308
County
Commuters
Proportion
Clark, IN
227
4.2%
Orange, IN
203
3.7%
Harrison, IN
174
3.2%
Floyd, IN
170
3.1%
Lawrence, IN
166
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

35. Labor shed in 2013 Labor market
The bulk (65 percent) of Washington County’s workforce is drawn from Washington or Clark Counties in Indiana. Another 5 percent is drawn from Orange County in Indiana. An additional 5 percent reside in Harrison County in Indiana. The final 5 percent of employees are from Floyd and Lawrence Counties in Indiana.
Combined, these 6 counties represent 80 percent of Washington County’s labor shed.
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

36. Takeaways Labor market
a sizable 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.
The Great Recession that impacted the U.S. economy between 2007 and 2009 took a major toll on Washington County’s labor force participation. While the unemployment rate was quite low in 2000, it increased more than fourfold to 12.2 percent by Recent figures make it clear that the unemployment rate has improved significantly since that time.
In contrast to the increase in the population over the past decade or more, the county’s labor force has fallen since This may be a natural decline due to an aging population or due to an increase in discouraged workers in the county leaving the labor market because they are unable to find jobs.
Approximately three-quarters of Washington County residents in the workforce are gainfully employed outside of the county. This constitutes
section 04

37. 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.
YourEconomy.org (YE): YE, an online tool by the Business Dynamics Research Consortium at the University of Wisconsin – Extension, provides data on the employment, sales, and number of establishments at numerous geographic levels in the United States.
A major data source for YE is the National Establishment Time Series Database (NETS), 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.
Notes
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.
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.
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. NETS is compiled from Duns & Bradstreet data by the Business Dynamics Research Consortium at the University of Wisconsin – Extension and is available from youreconomy.org.

38. 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

39. FOR MORE INFORMATION
Please contact
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.
Purdue Center for Regional Development (PCRD) seeks to pioneer new ideas and strategies that contribute to regional collaboration, innovation and prosperity.