1. DATA SNAPSHOT
Daviess County
Data SnapShot Series 1.1 June 2015

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

3. 01
introduction
Purpose
About Daviess County

4. Introduction
Purpose
This document provides information and data about Daviess 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 Daviess County Introduction County Background Established 1816
Seat
Washington
Area
437 sq. mi.
Neighboring
Counties
Dubois, IN
Greene, IN
Knox, IN
Martin, IN
Pike, IN
section 01

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

7. Population change 2000 2010 2013 2020 Total population projections
Demography
Population change
Total population projections
The total population is projected to increase by 5 percent between and 2020.
2000
2010
2013
2020
The county’s total population increased by 9 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 almost 2,700 persons.
International migration also increased by 600 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 1,251 individuals in Daviess County between and 2013.
Components of Population Change,
Total Change
1,859*
Natural Increase
2,687
International Migration
600
Domestic Migration
-1,251
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, 2013 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
Approximately 50.7 percent of the population was female in 2000 (15,115 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 2013 time period.
People 50 and over increased from 13.0% to 15.4% for males and from 16.5% to 17.3% for females between 2000 and Individuals of prime working age (20–49) dipped from 19.7% to 18.1% for males and from 19.0% to 17.3% for females. However, residents under 20 years of age remained constant at 31.7% of the total population.
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates

9. Demography
Race
2000
The proportion of non-White residents in Daviess County doubled between and 2013.
Every race experienced a numerical increase over the time period. Of the non- White races, the Asian (+156) and people of Two or More Race (+161) populations gained the most. Proportionally, the Asian (+211 percent) and Native (+130 percent) races gained the most. The White population increased by 2,069 residents between 2000 and 2013; however, on a proportional basis this was a small gain.
2013
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates

10. 2% 5% 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 620 Hispanics residing in Daviess County in This figure expanded to 1,480 by 2013, a percent increase.
Due to this numeric increase, the proportion of Hispanics in the population is now around 5 percent. 2%
Hispanics 5%
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates

11. Educational attainment
Demography
Educational attainment
Daviess County had a 3 percentage point increase in the number of adults (25 and older) with an associate’s, bachelor’s or graduate degree from 2000 to 2013.
The proportion of adults 25 years of age and older with a high school education or more improved from 72 percent in 2000 to 77 percent by Those with only a high school degree rose slightly from 40 percent in 2000 to 41 percent in 2013.
Adults with a college education increased from 17 percent in 2000 to 20 percent in This was due to a 1 percentage point increase in the proportion of residents with associate’s degrees (7 percent versus 8 percent), while the proportion of adults with a bachelor's degree or more increased from 10 percent to 12 percent, a 2 percentage point growth. .
2000
2013
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 ACS

12. Demography
Takeaways
Though the racial and ethnic diversity of Daviess County has doubled since 2000, it remains primarily white and non-Hispanic.
The educational attainment of adults 25 and over has improved since 2000, but the percentage of adults with a high school education (41 percent) or less (23 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 one in five adult residents of the county have an associate’s, bachelor’s, or higher degree, this figure is about 12 percent below the figure for the state of Indiana as a whole.
Daviess County may wish to assess the workforce skills of workers with a high school education only. Enhancing their skills so that they match the needs of local businesses and industries may be a worthy investment.
The population of Daviess 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).
In examining the composition of Daviess County’s population, one finds an aging population in which the largest age group of workers (50–59) is nearing retirement age. Additionally, the number of men and women of prime working age (20–49) is slowly declining. Noticeably, the number of persons between 30 and 39 years of age took a significant dip between 2000 and The drop is possibly due to domestic out-migration of people looking for opportunities out of the county or in other U.S. locations. On the other hand, the county experienced growth in the youngest residents (0–9 years of age) over the same time period.
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 Daviess County increased 61 percent from 2000 to
The rapid growth of establishments was largely due to natural change. That is, 2,140 establishments were launched in the county from to 2011, while 1,230 closed, resulting in a gain of 910 establishments. There was a small gain of 27 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 ( )
937
Natural Change (births minus deaths)
910
Net Migration 27
Self-employed
2-9 employees 3
10-99
employees
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

15. Number of establishments by stage/employment category
Economy
Number of establishments by stage/employment category
2000
2011
Stage
Establishments
Proportion
Stage 0
439
29%
826
33%
Stage 1
866
56%
1,400
57%
Stage 2
212
14%
227 9%
Stage 3 13 1% 15
Stage 4 1 0% -* -
Total
1,531
100%
2,468
ReferenceUSA indicates that Daviess Community Hospital is the Stage 4 establishment in Daviess County with 1,200 employees.
In 2000, the Stage 4 firm indicated by NETS is a branch of Perdue Farms, Inc that handled processed turkey. However, this establishment is shown to have closed in NETS has one other Perdue establishment, a poultry slaughtering and processing location with 60 employees in ReferenceUSA lists four Perdue Foods locations in Daviess County, with a maximum of 170 employees in total across the locations, none of which is listed as poultry processing. However, IN DWD lists Perdue as the second largest employer in the county, which does not match with the data from either NETS or ReferenceUSA.
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 does not show a Stage 4 firm. 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

16. Top five employers in 2015 Economy Establishment Stage1.
Daviess Community Hospital
Stage 4 2.
Perdue Farms, Inc. 3.
Boyd & Sons, Inc.
Stage 3 4.
Walmart Supercenter 5.
Grain Processing Corporation
The top five employers produce a mix of local, regional, and national goods and services.
Daviess Community Hospital in Washington is the largest establishment-level employer in Daviess County.
Daviess Community Hospital and Walmart provide primarily local and regional services, while Perdue Farms, Boyd & Sons, and Grain Processing Corporation are regional and national businesses.
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.
Note: URS Corporation, a Stage 3 establishment formerly known as EG&G Technical Services, is part of the Crane Technology Park. Because the facility is located just inside Daviess County and is associated with the NSWC – Crane Division, which is primarily located in Martin County, URS Corporation was omitted from the list of top employers.
section 03
Source: ReferenceUSA (Infogroup) and Daviess County Economic Development Corporation

17. Number of jobs by stage/employment category
Economy
Number of jobs by stage/employment category
2000
2011
Stage
Jobs*
Proportion
Stage 0
439 4%
826 6%
Stage 1
3,130
25%
4,241
32%
Stage 2
5,646
46%
5,639
43%
Stage 3
2,161
17%
2,469
19%
Stage 4
1,000 8% -
Total
12,376
100%
13,175
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

18. 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
$52,290,763 3%
$57,071,566 5%
Stage 1
$365,497,237
24%
$350,145,358
30%
Stage 2
$693,694,925
46%
$538,917,093
Stage 3
$275,071,976
18%
$230,540,925
19%
Stage 4
$141,141,717 9% -
Total
$1,527,696,619
100%
$1,176,674,942
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

19. Economy
Top five industries in 2013
55.1 percent of jobs are tied to one of the top five industries in Daviess County.
Manufacturing is the largest industry sector (2,225 jobs). Health Care & Social Assistance is the smallest of the top industry sectors with 1,197 jobs.
All of the top five industries in Daviess County gained jobs between 2002 and Of these, Construction gained the largest proportion (+36.3 percent), followed by Health Care & Social Assistance (+10.5 percent). Manufacturing experienced the smallest increase, with a 1.2 percent gain in jobs over the time period.
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
2013
Change ( )
% Change ( )
Average Total Earnings 2013 11
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting
1,279
950
-329
-26%
$33,096 21
Mining, Quarrying, & Oil & Gas Extraction
535
623 88
16%
$36,830 22
Utilities 56 42
-14
-25%
$83,542 23
Construction
1,415
1,929
514
36%
$41,931
31-33
Manufacturing
2,198
2,225 27 1%
$41,579
Wholesale Trade
458
410
-48
-10%
$52,332
44-45
Retail Trade
1,673
1,766 93 6%
$31,067
48-49
Transportation & Warehousing
835
1,057
222
27%
$37,747 51
Information
138 91
-47
-34%
$42,424 52
Finance & Insurance
402
489 87
22%
$42,248 53
Real Estate & Rental & Leasing
292
440
148
51%
$22,212 54
Professional, Scientific & Technical Services
316
470
154
49%
$48,503 55
Management of Companies and Enterprises
<10 19 -
$84,274
Administrative & Waste Management
253
539
286
113%
$13,349 61
Educational Services (Private)
247
133
-114
-46%
$18,888 62
Health Care & Social Assistance
1,083
1,197
114
11%
$32,274 71
Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 65
126
94%
$9,562 72
Accommodation and Food Services
814
881 67 8%
$12,504 81
Other Services (except Public Administration)
923
1,055
132
14%
$19,048 90
Government
1,786
1,888
102
$48,167 99
Unclassified Industry 0% $0
All
Total
14,769
16,331
1,562
$35,394
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) – – 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 Daviess County occurred in:
Administrative and Waste Management Services ( percent)
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation (+93.8 percent)
The largest percentage losses in employment occurred in:
Educational Services, private (-46.2 percent)
Information (-34.1 percent)
Employment Increase
Employment Decrease
Industries with the largest gains and losses in employment numbers between 2002 & 2013:
Construction (+514)
Administrative & Waste Management (+286)
Transportation & Warehousing (+222)
Agriculture & Forestry (-329)
Educational Services (-114)
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

22. Top five occupations in 2013
Economy
Top five occupations in 2013
The top five occupations in Daviess County represent percent of all jobs.
Sales & Related (1,838 jobs) is the top occupation classification in Daviess County, followed by Transportation and Material Moving (1,769 jobs). Production, the fifth largest occupation in the county, employs over 1,600 individuals.
All five top occupations in Daviess County, except Management (-3.4 percent), had an increase in jobs between 2002 and Construction & Extraction occupations gained the largest proportion (+25.1 percent), while Production occupations gained the least ( percent) over this time period.
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 2013
Change ( )
% Change ( )
Hourly Earnings 2013 11
Management
1,739
1,675
-64
-4%
$19.49 13
Business & Financial Operations
368
482
114
31%
$23.58 15
Computer & Mathematical 74 83 9
12%
$23.98 17
Architecture & Engineering
137
177 40
29%
$28.99 19
Life, Physical & Social Science 52 61
17%
$27.95 21
Community & Social Service
121
174 53
44%
$16.03 23
Legal 41 43 2 5%
$26.47 25
Education, Training & Library
668
572
-96
-14%
$16.44 27
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports & Media
205
258
26%
$16.66 29
Health Care Practitioners & Technical
610
767
157
$27.56 31
Health Care Support
345
397
15%
$10.99 33
Protective Service
120
129 8%
$17.10 35
Food Preparation & Serving Related
871
904 4%
$8.72 37
Building & Grounds Cleaning Maintenance
445
638
193
43%
$9.20 39
Personal Care & Service
576
563
-13
-2%
$8.55
Sales & Related
1,616
1,838
222
14%
$14.26
Office & Administrative Support
1,337
1,491
154
$13.74 45
Farming, Fishing & Forestry
170
141
-29
-17%
$13.10 47
Construction & Extraction
1,321
1,653
332
25%
$17.68 49
Installation, Maintenance & Repair
641
731 90
$16.79 51
Production
1,527
1,611 84 6%
$13.54
Transportation & Material Moving
1,622
1,769
147 9%
$13.93 55
Military 98
103 5
$18.46 99
Unclassified 66 70 4
$11.70
All
Total
14,769
16,331
1,562
11%
$15.67
section 03
Note: 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

24. Occupation distribution and change
Economy
Occupation distribution and change
Occupations with the largest gains and losses in employment numbers between 2002 & 2013:
Construction & Extraction (+332)
Sales & Related (+222)
Education, Training & Library (-96)
Management (-64)
Employment Increase
Employment Decrease
The largest percentage gains in employment in Daviess County occurred in:
Community and Social Service (+43.8 percent)
Building and Grounds Cleaning and Maintenance (+43.4 percent)
The largest percentage loss in employment occurred in:
Farming, Fishing and Forestry (-17.1 percent)
Education, Training and Library (-14.4 percent)
section 03
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

25. Income and poverty Economy 2000 2006 2013
Total Population in Poverty
12.4%
14.5%
13.9%
Minors (up to age 17) in Poverty
19.6%
22.5%
23.5%
Real Median Household Income (2013)*
$49,187
$44,854
$45,578
Real Per Capita Income (2013)*
$31,490
$32,898
$37,261
The median household income in Daviess County dipped by $3,600 between 2000 and in real dollars (that is, adjusted for inflation), while average income per person rose by $5,800 in real dollars over the same time period.
The total population in poverty and the number of minors in poverty increased slightly between and However, the proportion of the population in poverty was already high, and, by 2013, nearly one in four minors was living in poverty.
*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 Daviess County fluctuated between 2000 and 2009, but it is now improving. Per capita income has been gradually increasing since Poverty rates for adults and minors have stabilized over the past five years, although the rates remain relatively high for minors under 18 years of age.
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
Takeaways
The fluctuation and gradual decline in real median income experienced between 2000 and 2013 may be tied to employment changes in various industries in the county during that time period. Between 2002 and 2013, agriculture and education-related industries and occupations in Daviess County suffered declines, while jobs in construction and local services increased. While growth was felt by both low and high paying industries, positive shifts were concentrated in lower paying occupations, primarily among those paying less than $20 per hour. No doubt, the ability of Daviess 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 key industries in the county will be important to the economic stability of the county.
Growth in the number of establishments in Daviess 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.
Daviess 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 household income has gradually decreased and poverty has increased in Daviess County since While poverty rates for minors and the overall population have stabilized since , they remain higher than in In fact, a sizable proportion of minors (one in four) were living in poverty in 2013.
section 03

28. 04 labor market Labor force and unemployment Commuteshed Laborshed
Workforce inflow/outflow
Takeaways 04
labor
market

29. Labor force and unemployment
Labor market
Labor force and unemployment
2002
2013
Labor Force
14,072
14,985
Unemployment Rate
4.3%
5.5%
The labor force in Daviess County increased by 6.5 percent between and 2013.
On the other hand, the increase in the unemployment rate is likely due to a rise in the number of individuals who are either officially unemployed or who have given up looking for a job.
section 04
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics (2013 Annual Data Release)

30. Labor market
Unemployment rate Unemployment increased dramatically after 2007, peaking at 6.2 percent in Since that time, the rate has been on a slow but steady decline, dipping to 5.5 percent by 2013.
section 04
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics (2013 Annual Data Release)

31. Commuteshed Labor market Same Work/ Out-Commuters Home
A county’s commuteshed is the geographic area to which its resident labor force travels to work.
Forty-nine percent of employed residents in Daviess County commute to jobs located outside of the county. Knox County is the biggest destination for residents who work outside of Daviess County.
Twenty-one percent of out-commuters work in counties adjacent to Daviess County. However, the third, fourth and fifth largest work destinations outside of Daviess County are the Indianapolis (Marion County), Evansville (Vanderburgh County), and Terre Haute (Vigo County) metropolitan areas, respectively.
6,054
6,388
Commuters
Proportion
Knox, IN
935
7.5%
Dubois, IN
874
7.0%
Marion, IN
475
3.8%
Vanderburgh, IN
437
3.5%
Vigo, IN
431
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

32. Commuteshed in 2011 Labor market
Seventy percent of Daviess County’s working residents are employed either in Daviess, Dubois, Knox or Marion Counties. Another 5 percent commute to Vanderburgh County. An additional 5 percent travel to jobs in Martin or Vigo Counties.
Collectively, these seven counties represent 80 percent of the commuteshed for Daviess County.
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

33. Laborshed Labor market Same Work/ In-Commuters Home
A county’s laborshed is the geographic area from which it draws employees.
Forty-two percent of individuals working in Daviess County commute from another county.
Eighteen percent of in-commuters reside in counties adjacent to Daviess County, and all five of the top counties in the laborshed are adjacent counties. Of these counties, Martin County is the largest source of labor outside of Daviess County, while Dubois County is the smallest.
4,765
6,388
Commuters
Proportion
Martin, IN
636
5.7%
Knox, IN
631
Greene, IN
270
2.4%
Pike, IN
255
2.3%
Dubois, IN
247
2.2%
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

34. Laborshed in 2011 Labor market
The bulk (70 percent) of Daviess County’s workforce is drawn from Daviess, Knox or Martin Counties in Indiana. Another 5 percent is drawn from Dubois, Greene and Pike Counties. An additional 5 percent reside in Lawrence, Marion and Vanderburgh Counties in Indiana.
Combined, the nine counties represent 80 percent of Daviess County’s laborshed.
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

35. Workforce inflow and outflow in 2011
Labor market
Workforce inflow and outflow in 2011
Count
Proportion
Employed in Daviess County
11,153
100%
Both employed and living in the county
6,388
57%
Employed in the county but living outside
4,765
43%
Living in Daviess County
12,442
Both living and employed in the county
51%
Living in the county but employed outside
6,054
49%
Daviess 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 1,289 commuters. The resulting situation is that for every 100 employed residents, Daviess County has 90 jobs.
4,765
6,054
6,388
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

36. Takeaways Labor market
The Great Recession that impacted the U.S. economy between 2007 and 2009 took a toll on the Daviess County unemployment rate. While the rate was quite low in 2000, it more than doubled to over 6 percent by Recent figures make clear that the unemployment rate has improved significantly since 2010.
Along with the increase in the population over the past decade or more, the county’s labor force has grown since Despite growth in the number of residents employed or looking for a job, the unemployment rate is also higher. This may be a natural increase due to population growth. It is also possible that an increasing number of unemployed individuals who were discouraged workers previously have reentered the labor market and begun looking for a job.
Approximately one-half of Daviess County residents in the workforce are gainfully employed
outside of the county. This represents a tremendous loss of human talent that is 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 in the number of good paying jobs that will help keep these workers in Daviess County.
The laborshed and commuteshed data offer solid evidence of the value of pursuing economic and workforce development on a regional (multi-county) basis.
section 04

37. 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 commuteshed and laborshed 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.

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
Cindy Barber
Purdue Extension -- Daviess County
Associate Community Development Educator
, extension 279
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.