1. DATA SNAPSHOT
Jefferson County
Data SnapShot Series 1.1 September 2015

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

3. 01
introduction
Purpose
About Jefferson County

4. Introduction
Purpose
This document provides information and data about Jefferson 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 Jefferson County
Introduction
About Jefferson County
County Background
Established
1811
County
Seat
Madison
Area
363 sq. mi.
Neighboring
Counties
Carroll, KY
Clark, IN
Jennings, IN
Ripley, IN
Scott, IN
Switzerland, IN
Trimble, KY
Metropolitan Status
Micropolitan
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 1 percent between and 2020.
2000
2010
2013
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 largest contributor to that expansion, with a gain of 673 persons.
Domestic migration, the difference between the number of people moving into the county versus moving out, was the second strongest driver of population change in Jefferson County, resulting in an increase of 493 individuals. In contrast, international migration resulted in a relatively small gain of 170 individuals to the county from outside the United States between 2000 and 2013.
Components of Population Change,
Total Change
1,164*
Natural Increase
673
International Migration
170
Domestic Migration
493
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 50.5 percent of the population was female in 2000 (16,006 people) and that percentage rose slightly to 51.9 percent in However, a more drastic change occurred in the distribution of people across the various age categories. A larger share of people shifted into the higher age groupings between 2000 and 2013.
People 50 and over increased from 13.4% to 17.8% for males and from 16.1% to 19.6% for females between 2000 and Individuals of prime working age (20 to 49) dipped from 21.7% to 18.3% for males and from 20.8% to 20.0% for females. Residents under 20 years of age decreased from 27.9% to 24.3% 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 Jefferson County increased by one third between 2000 and 2013.
Every race experienced a numerical increase over the time period. Of the non-White races, the county had the most growth in individuals identifying themselves as Black (+174) or Two or More Races (+125). Proportionally, these two races also gained the most, with a 41.3 percent increase in Two or More Races and a 36.6 percent increase in Blacks.
The White population increased by residents between 2000 and 2013, an increase of only 2.4 percent.
2013
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates

10. 1% 2% Ethnicity Demography
Hispanic
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 332 Hispanics residing in Jefferson County in This figure expanded to 774 by 2013, a percent increase.
Due to this numeric increase, the proportion of Hispanics in the population is now around 2 percent. 1%
Hispanic 2%
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates

11. Educational attainment
Demography
Educational attainment
Jefferson County had a 4 percentage point increase in the number of adults (25 and older) with an associate’s, bachelor’s or graduate degree from to 2013.
The proportion of adults 25 years of age and older with a high school education or more improved from 81 percent in 2000 to 84 percent by Those with only a high school degree fell slightly from 40 percent in to 38 percent in 2013.
Adults with a college degree increased from 20 percent in 2000 to 24 percent in This was due to a 2 percentage point increase in the proportion of residents with associate’s degrees (4 percent versus 6 percent), while the proportion of adults with at least a bachelor's degree increased from 16 percent to 18 percent, a 2 percentage point growth. .
2000
2013
section 02
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 ACS

12. Demography
Takeaways
The population of Jefferson County is expected to continue to grow gradually over the next few years. If past trends hold, that increase will be the result of natural increase (more births than deaths) and domestic migration.
Jefferson County’s population aged between and 2013, and the largest age group of workers in 2013 (50 to 59 years of age) is nearing retirement age. Additionally, the number of men and women of prime working age (20 to 49 years of age) also shrank between 2000 and This drop is possibly due to out-migration of people looking for job opportunities in other locations.
The racial and ethnic diversity of Jefferson County has modestly increased since 2000, but the county remains primarily white and non- Hispanic.
The educational attainment of adults 25 years of age and over has improved since 2000, and the percentage of adults with a high school education or less (54 percent) is over half of the county’s population. The number of adults with at least a college degree has continued to grow (24 percent). However, only one quarter of the adult residents of Jefferson County have an associate’s, bachelor’s or higher degree, which is 8 percentage points below the figure for the state of Indiana as a whole.
Jefferson 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.
Comparison Notes:
Only Boone, Hamilton, and Monroe Counties have higher numbers of bachelor’s graduates ( ACS)
Only Lake, LaPorte, Howard, Marion, and Allen counties have more racial minorities (2013 PEP)
Marion, Clinton, Cass, Marshall, Noble, Elkhart, Porter, and Lake have more Hispanics (2013 (PEP)
Highest proportion of foreign-born in the state ( ACS)
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 Jefferson County increased 43 percent from 2000 to
The rapid growth of establishments was largely due to natural change. That is, 2,269 establishments were launched in the county between 2000 and , while 1,573 closed, resulting in a gain of establishments. There was a gain of 33 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
Self-employed
2-9 employees
Components of Change for Establishments
Total Change ( )
729
Natural Change (births minus deaths)
696
Net Migration 33 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
465
27%
818
34%
Stage 1
994
58%
1,390
57%
Stage 2
220
13%
200 8%
Stage 3 19 1% 22
Stage 4 6 0% 3*
Total
1,704
100%
2,433
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 four Stage 4 firms in 2011 (that also existed in 2015), whereas NETS shows 3 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

16. Top five employers in 2015 Economy Establishment Stage1.
King’s Daughters’ Health*
Stage 4 2.
Arvin Sango, Inc. 3.
Madison Precision Products, Inc. 4.
Grote Industries, Inc.
Stage 3 5.
Madison State Hospital
The top five employers produce regional, national and global goods and services.
King’s Daughters’ Health in Madison, a regional medial provider, is the largest establishment-level employer in Jefferson County.
The next three top employers produce goods used nationally and globally. Arvin Sango, Madison Precision and Grote all produce mechanical parts. The final establishment, Madison State Hospital provides psychiatric services.
Information on the top 5 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 procedures 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.
*King’s Daughters’ Health has several locations throughout Madison, Indiana, including a cancer center and patient billing location. Total employment for the system is given for each separate establishment, so we are unable to list each establishment separately.
section 03
Source: ReferenceUSA (Infogroup)

17. Number of jobs by stage/employment category
Economy
Number of jobs by stage/employment category
2000
2011
Stage
Jobs*
Proportion
Stage 0
465 3%
818 5%
Stage 1
3,635
20%
4,381
25%
Stage 2
5,843
32%
5,539
31%
Stage 3
4,077
22%
4,827
27%
Stage 4
4,210
23%
2,082
12%
Total
18,230
100%
17,647
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
$52,981,983 2%
$60,880,212 4%
Stage 1
$466,697,788
20%
$373,989,545
24%
Stage 2
$649,253,482
27%
$415,621,113
Stage 3
$563,594,705
$527,116,793
34%
Stage 4
$652,196,681
$173,571,683
11%
Total
$2,384,724,638
100%
$1,551,179,346
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 2014
62.9 percent of jobs are tied to one of the top five industries in Jefferson County.
Manufacturing is the largest industry sector with 2,941 jobs. Accommodation & Food Services is the smallest of the top five industry sectors with 1,389 jobs.
Of the top industries in Jefferson County, two gained jobs between 2002 and Of these, Accommodation & Food Services experienced the largest percentage job growth (+22.2 percent), followed by Health Care & Social Assistance. Manufacturing lost the most, with a 16.9 percent loss 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
2014
Change ( )
% Change ( )
Average Total Earnings 2014 11
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting
777
668
-109
-14%
$30,686 21
Mining, Quarrying, & Oil & Gas Extraction
<10 - 22
Utilities
428
453 25 6%
$104,166 23
Construction
868
639
-229
-26%
$30,970
31-33
Manufacturing
3,541
2,941
-600
-17%
$59,104 42
Wholesale Trade
123
191 68
55%
$45,641
44-45
Retail Trade
2,096
1,927
-169
-8%
$26,858
48-49
Transportation & Warehousing
246
272 26
11%
$37,696 51
Information
161
113
-48
-30%
$152,970 52
Finance & Insurance
359
475
116
32%
$42,757 53
Real Estate & Rental & Leasing
349
449
100
29%
$20,962 54
Professional, Scientific & Technical Services
384
410 7%
$34,314 55
Management of Companies and Enterprises 15 41
173%
$52,899 56
Administrative & Waste Management
414
795
381
92%
$21,901 61
Educational Services (Private)
746
903
157
21%
$29,543 62
Health Care & Social Assistance
1,761
1,911
150 9%
$51,347 71
Arts, Entertainment & Recreation
170
194 24
14%
$10,725 72
Accommodation and Food Services
1,137
1,389
252
22%
$14,923 81
Other Services (except Public Administration)
866
699
-167
-19%
$19,646 90
Government
2,553
2,512
-41
-2%
$41,428 99
Unclassified Industry
- <10
-100% $0
All
Total
17,002
16,986
-16 0%
$40,009
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. High information sector earnings are due to extended proprietors.
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 Jefferson County occurred in:
Management ( percent)
Administrative, Support, Waste Management, and Remediation Services (+92.0 percent)
The largest percentage losses in employment occurred in:*
Information (-29.8 percent)
Construction (-26.4 percent)
Employment Increase
Employment Decrease
Industries with the largest gains and losses in employment numbers between 2002 & 2014:
Administrative & Waste Management (+381)
Accommodation & Food Services (+252)
Manufacturing (-600)
Construction (-229)
*The largest percentage loss was technically in the Unclassified Industry category, which experienced a 100 percent loss in jobs.
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 Jefferson County represent percent of all jobs.
Production (2,222 jobs) is the top occupation classification in Jefferson County at 13.1 percent. The smallest of these is Food Preparation & Serving Related occupations with 1,364 jobs.
Two of the five top occupations in Jefferson County had an increase in jobs between 2002 and Food Preparation & Serving Related occupations experienced the largest percentage gains (+18.8 percent), while Office & Administrative Support occupations stayed almost constant ( percent). Over the time period, Production occupations lost the most, with a percent decrease in jobs.
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 2013 11
Management
1,504
1,427
-77
-5%
$21.58 13
Business & Financial Operations
469
517 48
10%
$23.62 15
Computer & Mathematical
149
148 -1
-1%
$23.63 17
Architecture & Engineering
418
338
-80
-19%
$32.52 19
Life, Physical & Social Science 74 86 12
16%
$25.64 21
Community & Social Service
186
212 26
14%
$18.81 23
Legal 59 67 8
$26.83 25
Education, Training & Library
942
918
-24
-3%
$18.92 27
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports & Media
337
333 -4
$14.57 29
Health Care Practitioners & Technical
952
1,021 69 7%
$31.54 31
Health Care Support
516
511 -5
$13.11 33
Protective Service
189
231 42
22%
$14.61 35
Food Preparation & Serving Related
1,148
1,364
216
19%
$9.07 37
Building & Grounds Cleaning Maintenance
573
590 3%
$10.59 39
Personal Care & Service
592
561
-31
$10.12 41
Sales & Related
1,875
1,834
-41
-2%
$12.33 43
Office & Administrative Support
1,964
1,976 1%
$13.65 45
Farming, Fishing & Forestry 51 9
21%
$11.47 47
Construction & Extraction
759
629
-130
-17%
$16.14 49
Installation, Maintenance & Repair
722
729 7
$19.10
Production
2,401
2,222
-179
-7%
$15.57 53
Transportation & Material Moving
947
1,014
$13.30 55
Military
106
101
$18.64 99
Unclassified 78
104
33%
$19.40
All
Total
17,002
16,986
-16 0%
$16.53
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 Jefferson County occurred in:*
Protective Service (+22.2 percent)
Farming, Fishing, and Forestry (+21.4 percent)
The largest percentage loss in employment occurred in:
Architecture and Engineering (-19.1 percent)
Construction and Extraction (-17.1 percent)
Occupations with the largest gains and losses in employment numbers between 2002 & 2014:
Food Preparation (+216)
Healthcare Practitioners (+69)
Transportation (+67)
Production (-179)
Construction & Extraction (-130)
Employment Increase
Employment Decrease
*Unclassified occupations actually experienced the largest percentage gains in employment at 33.3 percent, but since this is difficult to classify, it was excluded.
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
10.0%
14.3%
15.3%
Minors (up to age 17) in Poverty
14.1%
19.4%
22.3%
Real Median Household Income (2013)*
$50,520
$47,528
$44,569
Real Per Capita Income (2013)*
$29,504
$31,884
$32,484
The median household income in Jefferson County dipped by $6,000 between 2000 and in real dollars (that is, adjusted for inflation), while real income per person increased by $3,000 over the same time period.
The total population in poverty and the number of minors in poverty increased by over 50 percent between 2000 and More than 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

26. Economy
Income and poverty Median household income in Jefferson County decreased between 2000 and 2011, but the latest figures suggest that it is now improving. Per capita income gradually increased between 2000 and 2004 but has remained fairly constant since. Poverty rates for both adults and minors have increased since 2002, peaking in However, both have declined over the past three years, although the rates remain relatively high in contrast to the figures in 2000.
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 gradual 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 manufacturing industry jobs (yearly earnings of $153,000 and $59,000, respectively) declined, while moderate and low- paying industries, such as Health Care & Social Assistance ($51,000) and Administrative Support ($22,000), grew in Jefferson County. Occupations showed the same trend as moderate-paying Construction and Production jobs ($16 per hour) were lost and mainly low-paying Food Preparation ($9 per hour) jobs were gained. The ability of Jefferson 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 associates 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 Jefferson 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.
Jefferson 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. Focusing on continuing to attract Stage 3 establishments may also be beneficial.
Real median income has decreased, despite growth in real per capita income. The increased poverty rate for both minors and the total population indicates a growing income imbalance in the county since One quarter of minors in Jefferson County were in poverty by 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
2007
2014
Labor Force
16,732
17,081
15,196
Unemployment Rate
5.0%
4.9%
6.0%
The size of the labor force in Jefferson County fell by 9.2 percent between and 2014.
This decrease could be due to a rise in the number of individuals who are either officially unemployed, who have given up looking for a job, who have moved out of the country or who have left the workforce due to retirement.
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 11.4 percent in Since that time, the rate has been on a steady decline, dipping to 6.0 percent by 2014.
section 04
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics (2014 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.
Fifty-two percent of employed residents in Jefferson County commute to jobs located outside of the county. Marion County is the biggest destination for residents who work outside of Jefferson County.
Fifteen percent of out-commuters work in counties adjacent to Jefferson County. However, the largest work destination outside of Jefferson County is the Indianapolis (Marion County, IN) metropolitan area. The third and fifth largest work destinations are the Cincinnati (Hamilton County, OH) and Louisville (Scott County, IN) metropolitan areas.
7,886
7,178
Commuters
Proportion
Marion, IN
619
4.1%
Carroll, KY
527
3.5%
Hamilton, OH
377
2.5%
Bartholomew, IN
337
2.2%
Scott, IN
336
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

32. Commuteshed in 2013 Labor market
Sixty-five percent of Jefferson County’s working residents are employed in Bartholomew, Jefferson, Jennings, Marion or Scott Counties in Indiana; Carroll County, Kentucky; or Hamilton County, Ohio. Another 5 percent commute to Jackson or Vanderburgh Counties in Indiana, or Butler County, Ohio. An additional 5 percent travel to jobs in Allen, Clark, or Tippecanoe Counties in Indiana, or Jefferson County Kentucky.
Collectively, these 14 counties represent 75 percent of the commuteshed for Jefferson County.
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

33. Laborshed in 2013 Labor market
The bulk (65 percent) of Jefferson County’s workforce is drawn from Jefferson County, Indiana, and Trimble County, Kentucky. Another 5 percent is drawn from Jennings and Scott Counties in Indiana. An additional 5 percent reside in Clark and Ripley Counties in Indiana.
Combined, these six counties represent 75 percent of Jefferson County’s laborshed.
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

34. Laborshed Labor market Same Work/ In-Commuters Home
A county’s laborshed is the geographic area from which it draws employees.
Forty-one percent of individuals working in Jefferson County commute from another county.
Eighteen percent of in-commuters reside in counties adjacent to Jefferson County, and all five top counties in the laborshed are adjacent counties. The largest and second smallest of these top sources of labor are in the Louisville (Trimble County, KY, and Clark County, IN) metropolitan area.
5,013
7,178
Commuters
Proportion
Trimble, KY
459
3.8%
Jennings, IN
411
3.4%
Scott, IN
401
3.3%
Clark, IN
338
2.8%
Ripley, IN
331
2.7%
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

35. Workforce inflow and outflow in 2013
Labor market
Workforce inflow and outflow in 2013
Jefferson 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 2,873 commuters. The resulting situation is that for every 100 employed residents, Jefferson County has 81 jobs.
Count
Proportion
Employed in Jefferson County
12,191
100%
Both employed and living in the county
7,178
58.9%
Employed in the county but living outside
5,013
41.1%
Living in Jefferson County
15,064
Both living and employed in the county
47.7%
Living in the county but employed outside
7,886
52.3%
5,013
7,886
7,178
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

36. Takeaways Labor market
Approximately 52 percent of Jefferson County residents in the workforce are gainfully employed outside of the county, while 41 percent of individuals employed in Jefferson County are not county residents. It may be worthwhile for local leaders and industries to determine the human capital attributes of workers who commute to jobs inside and outside the county. By so doing, they could determine whether there is leakage of educated and skilled workers to surrounding counties. Such an analysis will help determine the mix of human capital attributes that are needed to spur the growth of good paying jobs in the county.
The laborshed and commuteshed data offer solid evidence of the value of pursuing economic and workforce development on a regional (multi-county) basis.
The Great Recession that impacted the U.S. economy between 2007 and 2009 took a major toll on employment in Jefferson County. While the unemployment rate was quite low in 2000, it nearly quadrupled to 11.4 percent by Recent figures make it clear that the unemployment rate has improved significantly since 2010, now at almost half the peak.
Despite the gradual increase in the population over the past decade or more, the size of the county’s labor force has declined since This may be due to growth in the number of residents that are past retirement age in the county. The unemployment rate is also higher than in 2002, possibly because, as a result of the improving economy, an increasing number of unemployed individuals who previously were discouraged workers have reentered the labor market and started looking for a job.
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. Purdue University is an equal access/equal opportunity institution.
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
Purdue University is an equal access/equal opportunity institution.

39. FOR MORE INFORMATION
Please contact
PCRD
1341 Northwestern Avenue
West Lafayette, IN 47906
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.