Data SnapShot Series 1.0February 2015

DATA SNAPSHOTLaPorte County

Table of contents

Introduction01Demography02

Economy03Labor Market04

Purpose

About LaPorte County

01introduction

4

Purpose This document provides information and data about LaPorte 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.

Introduction

section 01

5

About LaPorte CountyIntroduction

section 01

County Background Established 1832

CountySeat

LaPorte

Area 613 sq. mi.

NeighboringCounties

Berrien, MIJasper, INPorter, IN

St. Joseph, INStarke, IN

Population change

Population pyramids

Race

Ethnicity

Educational attainment

Takeaways

02demography

7

110,106

111,467 111,

281

112,471

Population change

Components of Population Change, 2000-2013Total Change 948

Natural Increase 3,723

International Migration 1,000

Domestic Migration -3,131

The total population is projected to increase by 1 percent between 2013 and 2020.

Demography

Sources: STATSIndiana, U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census, 2010 Decennial Census, 2013 Estimates, Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change

section 02

The total population increased by 1 percent between 2000 and 2013. The major contributor to that expansion was natural increase (births minus deaths over that span of time) with a net growth of over 3,700 persons.

Data on domestic migration (the difference between the number of people moving out of the county versus moving in) show that out-migration outpaced in-migration by more than 3,100 people. On the other hand, international migration had a net increase of 1,000, indicating that the county experienced an influx of new people from outside the U.S.

Total population projections

2000

2010

2013

2020

8

0-910-1920-2930-3940-4950-5960-6970-79

80+

9 6 3 0 3 6 9

6.0%6.4%

7.4%7.2%7.3%

7.6%5.7%

2.9%1.4%

5.9%6.0%5.5%5.5%6.3%7.2%6.0%3.4%2.5%

Percent of Total PopulationAg

e Co

hort

0-910-1920-2930-3940-4950-5960-6970-79

80+

9 6 3 0 3 6 9

6.9%7.1%7.1%

8.2%8.5%

6.0%3.6%

2.8%1.1%

6.4%6.5%5.6%6.7%7.5%5.8%3.9%3.8%2.3%

Percent of Total Population

Age

Coho

rt

Population pyramidsPopulation pyramids are visual representations of the age distribution of the population by gender.

While the male to female ratio of the population did not change dramatically between 2000 and 2013, the distribution of people across the various age categories did change over the two periods of time.

Demography

Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates

section 02

The percentage of people under 50 years old has decreased for both males and females over the 2000-2013 period. In addition, the number 50 years old and over now stands at nearly 40,700 people (about 37 percent of the population, up from 29 percent in 2000).

Male

Female

20132000Male

Female

9

White86%

BlackAsianNativeTwo or More Races

White88%

BlackAsianNativeTwo or More Races

RaceThe number of non-White residents in LaPorte County increased by 2 percentage points between 2000 and 2013.While every race, other than White, experienced a numerical increase since 2000, the population of Black and those of Mixed Races gained the most people, helping to expand the population of Other Races from 12 percent to 14 percent of the total population between 2000 and 2013.

Demography

Race Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates

section 02

2000

2013

10

EthnicityHispanics 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 3,416 Hispanics residing in LaPorte County in 2000. This figure expanded to 6,569 by 2013, a 92.3 percent increase. As a result, Hispanics now make up 6 percent of the overall population (versus 3 percent in 2000).

Demography

Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates

section 02

6%

3%

Hispanics - 2000

Hispanics - 2013

11

No High School;

19%

High School;

41%

Some College;

20%

Asso-ciate's Degree,

6%

Bache-lor's

Degree or More;

14%

Educational attainment LaPorte County witnessed a 5

percent increase between 2000 and 2013 in the proportion of adults (25 and over) with an

associate’s, bachelor’s or graduate degree.

The proportion of adults 25 years of age and older with a high school

education or more improved from 81 percent in 2000 to 86 percent by

2013.

Residents with less than a high school education fell by 5

percentage points and those with some college education rose by 1

percentage point from 2000 to 2013.

The number of adults with a college degree increased from 20 percent in

2000 to 25 percent in 2013. This was due to a 2 percent increase in

associate’s degrees and a 3 percent increase in adults with at least a

bachelor's degree.

Demography

Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 ACS

section 02

2000

2013

No High School;

14%

High School;

40%Some Col-lege; 21%

Asso-ciate's Degree;

8%

Bache-lor's

Degree or More;

17%

12

Takeaways The population of LaPorte County is expected to grow modestly over the next few years, and if past trends hold, that increase will be largely due to natural increase (more births than deaths). While LaPorte County’s population has been growing over the 2000 to 2013 period, it has also been aging. This suggests a need to take a hard look at how the county can remain hospitable and responsive to the needs of growing number of people over 50. In addition, the county’s domestic migration has declined by over 3,000, suggesting that young individuals and those of prime working age (30 to 39 and 40 to 49 years of age) are moving out of the county at a faster pace than they are moving in.

While the population remains largely white, the growth of the Hispanic community is worthy of note. As such, finding ways to address the needs and opportunities of a diversifying population will be important. The educational attainment of adults 25 and over has improved since 2000, but the number with a high school education only continues to be high (at 40 percent). So, determining if this could be a barrier to economic growth is worthy of examining.

LaPorte County may want to explore the mix of services and amenities that will be vital to retaining and attracting educated young adults, including the availability of good quality jobs.

Demography

section 02

Establishments

Industries

Occupations

Income and poverty

Takeaways

03economy

14

Establishments

Components of Change for EstablishmentsTotal Change (2000-11) 2,144

Natural Change (births minus deaths) 2,043

Net Migration (number moving in versus moving out of the county)

101

The number of establishments in LaPorte County doubled between 2000 and 2011. The rapid growth of establishments was largely due to natural change. That is, 7,081 establishments were launched in the county between 2000 and 2011, while 4,937 closed, resulting in a gain of 2,144 establishments.

Economy

Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database

section 03

An establishment is a physical business

location. Branches, standalones and

headquarters are all considered types of

establishments.

Definition of Company Stages0 12 3

4

Self-employed

2-9 employees

10-99employees

100-499employees

500+employees

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.

15

Number of establishments by stage/employment category

Economy

Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database

section 03

2000 2011Stage Establishmen

ts Proportion Establishments Proportion

Stage 0 1,294 24% 2,175 29%

Stage 1 2,994 56% 4,348 58%

Stage 2 925 17% 850 11%

Stage 3 79 1% 68 1%

Stage 4 13 0% 8 0%

Total 5,305 100% 7,449 100%

Note: The 2011 figures use 2012 data to include all gains and losses over the entire year.

16

Number of jobs by stage/employment category

Economy

Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database

section 03

2000 2011Stage Jobs Proportion Jobs Proportion

Stage 0 1,294 2% 2,175 4%

Stage 1 11,164 18% 13,607 24%

Stage 2 23,972 40% 22,641 39%

Stage 3 14,500 24% 12,630 22%

Stage 4 9,435 16% 6,845 12%

Total 60,365 100% 57,898 100%

Note: The 2011 figures use 2012 data to include all gains and losses over the entire year.

17

Amount of sales (2011 dollars) by stage/employment category

Economy

Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Databasesection 03

2000 2011Stage Sales Proportion Sales Proportion

Stage 0 $160,046,855 2% $146,378,224 3%

Stage 1 $1,670,192,872 21% $1,212,360,959 21%

Stage 2 $3,034,642,492 38% $2,086,169,167 37%

Stage 3 $2,001,047,378 25% $1,719,904,604 30%

Stage 4 $1,169,791,625 15% $535,943,906 9%

Total $8,035,721,221 100% $5,700,756,860 100%

Note: The 2011 figures use 2012 data to include all gains and losses over the entire year.

18

Manufacturing14.5%

Government13.6%

Retail Trade12.3%

Health Care & Social Assis-

tance11.1%

Accommoda-tion & Food

Services8.0%

All Other Indus-tries

40.5%

Top five industries in 201359.5 percent of jobs are tied to one of the top five industries in LaPorte County.Manufacturing is the largest industry sector (7,756 jobs), followed by government (7,262 jobs) and retail trade (6,586 jobs).Accommodation & Food Services is the smallest of the top industry sectors with 4,272 jobs.The top four industries all lost jobs between 2002 and 2013. Only Accommodation & Food Services experienced job gains over the two periods of time (12 percent growth).

Economy

Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

section 03

19

Industry distribution and changeNAICS Code

Description Jobs 2002

Jobs 2013

Change (2002-2013)

% Change (2002-2013)

Average Total

Earnings 2013

11 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting 1,079 1,147 68 6% $28,778

21 Mining, Quarrying, & Oil & Gas Extraction 128 56 -72 -56% $12,669

22 Utilities 280 238 -42 -15% $170,36723 Construction 3,336 2,679 -657 -20% $52,22931-33 Manufacturing 9,621 7,756 -1,865 -19% $59,85642 Wholesale Trade 1,264 1,413 149 12% $52,10944-45 Retail Trade 7,053 6,586 -467 -7% $23,79248-49 Transportation & Warehousing 2,341 2,100 -241 -10% $47,54251 Information 834 396 -438 -53% $33,44052 Finance & Insurance 1,269 1,496 227 18% $55,53753 Real Estate & Rental & Leasing 1,831 2,109 278 15% $23,97054 Professional, Scientific & Technical

Services 1,505 1,553 48 3% $35,344

55 Management of Companies and Enterprises 70 154 84 120% $72,808

56 Administrative & Waste Management 2,654 2,994 340 13% $25,87861 Educational Services (Private) 538 544 6 1% $26,15962 Health Care & Social Assistance 6,464 5,952 -512 -8% $53,01471 Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 1,864 1,783 -81 -4% $27,56172 Accommodation and Food Services 3,825 4,272 447 12% $14,95381 Other Services (except Public

Administration) 2,756 2,980 224 8% $19,42990 Government 8,156 7,262 -894 -11% $48,16099 Unclassified Industry <10 <10 - - -All Total 56,870 53,473 -3,397 -6% $40,108

Economy

Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

section 03

20

Employment Increase

Employment Decrease

Industries with the largest gains and losses in employment numbers between 2002 & 2013:

Industry distribution and change

The largest percentage gains in employment in LaPorte County occurred in: Management of Companies

and Enterprises (+120.0 percent)

Finance and Insurance (+17.9 percent)

The largest percentage losses in employment occurred in: Mining, Quarrying and Oil and

Gas Extraction (-56.3 percent) Information (-52.5 percent)

Economy

Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

section 03

Manufacturing(-1,865)

Government(-894)

Construction(-657)

Accommodation and Food

Services (+447)

Administrative and Waste

Management (+340)

21

Sales & Related 14.3%

Office & Administrative Support 12.6%

Produc-tion 9.9%

Food Preparation & Serving Related

8.7%

Transportation & Mate-rial Moving

6.2%

All Other Occupa-

tions48.3%

Top five occupations in 2013

The top five occupations in LaPorte County represent 51.7 percent of all jobs.Sales & Related (14.3 percent of the workforce with 7,660 jobs) and Office & Administrative Support (12.6 percent of the labor force involving 6,723 jobs) represent the top two occupations in LaPorte County. Transportation & Material Moving is the smallest of the top five occupations in the county (with 6.2 percent of the workforce and 3,319 jobs).

Economy

Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

section 03

22

SOC Description Jobs

2002Jobs 2013

Change (2002-2013)

% Change (2002-2013)

Hourly Earnings

201311 Management 3,154 3,142 -12 0% $24.4913 Business & Financial Operations 1,617 1,664 47 3% $24.2715 Computer & Mathematical 485 426 -59 -12% $24.5617 Architecture & Engineering 782 646 -136 -17% $28.8619 Life, Physical & Social Science 232 226 -6 -3% $25.6121 Community & Social Service 916 732 -184 -20% $16.9523 Legal 228 198 -30 -13% $26.4225 Education, Training & Library 2,372 2,350 -22 -1% $20.9327 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports &

Media 1,094 1,013 -81 -7% $13.3429 Health Care Practitioners & Technical 2,460 2,384 -76 -3% $41.4731 Health Care Support 1,358 1,266 -92 -7% $11.8733 Protective Service 2,129 1,965 -164 -8% $19.1235 Food Preparation & Serving Related 4,396 4,664 268 6% $9.3637 Building & Grounds Cleaning

Maintenance 1,922 2,077 155 8% $10.1339 Personal Care & Service 2,057 2,280 223 11% $9.4141 Sales & Related 7,508 7,660 152 2% $13.6043 Office & Administrative Support 7,640 6,723 -917 -12% $14.5845 Farming, Fishing & Forestry 239 272 33 14% $9.5547 Construction & Extraction 3,009 2,497 -512 -17% $19.9049 Installation, Maintenance & Repair 2,216 2,023 -193 -9% $17.9651 Production 6,556 5,302 -1,254 -19% $15.3453 Transportation & Material Moving 3,877 3,319 -558 -14% $16.3355 Military 383 375 -8 -2% $19.2799 Unclassified 239 269 30 13% $11.58All Total 56,870 53,473 -3,397 -6% $16.96

Occupation distribution and changeEconomy

Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

section 03

23

Occupations with the largest gains and losses in employment numbers between 2002 & 2013:

Employment Increase

Employment Decrease

Food Preparation & Serving

(+268)

Personal Care & Service(+223)

Production(-1,254)Office &

Administrative(-917)

Transportation & Material Moving

(-558)

Occupation distribution and change

Economy

Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors

section 03

The largest percentage gain in employment in LaPorte County occurred in: Farming, Fishery and Forestry

(+12.8 percent) Personal Care and Service

(+10.8 percent) Building Grounds and

Cleaning Maintenance (+8.1 percent)

The largest percentage loss in employment occurred in: Community and Social Service

(-20.1 percent) Production (-19.1 percent)

24

Income and poverty

2000 2006 2013

Total Population in Poverty 9.5% 12.0% 17.0%

Minors (up to age 17) in Poverty 12.7% 18.6% 26.9%

Real Median Income (2013 base year)

$ 53,611 $ 53,213 $ 46,610

The median income in LaPorte County dipped by $7,000 between 2000 and 2013 in real dollars (that is, adjusted for inflation).Both the total population in poverty and the number of minors in poverty increased since 2000. A key statistic is that the number of minors in poverty more than doubled between 2000 and 2013.

Economy

Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE)section 03

25

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

42,000

44,000

46,000

48,000

50,000

52,000

54,000

56,000

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Real

Med

ian

Inco

me

(201

3 do

l-la

rs)

Popu

latio

n in

Pov

erty

(per

cent

)

Median Income

Minors in Poverty

All Ages in Poverty

Income and povertyMedian income in LaPorte County has decreased in recent years, while poverty has continued to increase.

Economy

Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE)

section 03

26

Takeaways Growth in the number of establishments in LaPorte County occurred in businesses having fewer than 10 employees (the self-employed and Stage 1 enterprises). These are two components of the local economy that are often overlooked but may deserve closer attention by local leaders. Industries that have experienced major job losses have tended to be in the manufacturing, government, construction and health care and social assistance sectors, all with average earnings of $48,000 or more. Growth in jobs has occurred in industries that pay decent wages (such as Finance & Insurance and Wholesale Trade) but also by industries that provide low average earnings (Accommodation & Food Services, Administrative & Waste Management, and Real Estate & Leasing). It may be these

shifts in the industry make-up of the county that have contributed to a decline in median income (in real dollars) and the upswing in the poverty rate in LaPorte County since 2000.With the exception of business and financial operations, occupations that have grown the most between 2002 and 2013 in the county pay an average hourly rate of $9.36 to $13.60. This level of compensation will not be sufficient to retain well-educated or highly skilled workers. It may be worthwhile for LaPorte County to focus on policies and programs that strengthen high-growth Stage 2 firms, since they tend to employ several people and are capturing sizable sales.Services targeted to poverty-stricken individuals should be considered given the dramatic rise in poverty, especially for children under 18 years old.

Economy

section 03

Labor force and unemployment

Commuteshed

Laborshed

Takeaways

04labormarket

28

Labor force and unemployment

2002 2013

Labor Force 54,092 48,905

Unemployment Rate 6.8% 9.4%

The labor force in LaPorte County decreased by 9.6 percent between 2002 and 2013. This decrease 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.

Labor market

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics

section 04

29

20002001

20022003

20042005

20062007

20082009

20102011

20122013

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

3.3%

6.8%

5.1%

11.9%

9.4%

Unem

ploy

men

t Rat

e (p

erce

nt)

Unemployment rateUnemployment increased dramatically after 2007, peaking at 11.9 percent in 2009. Since that time, the rate has been on a slow but steady decline, dipping to 9.4 percent by 2013.

Labor market

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics

section 04

30

Commuteshed

A county’s commuteshed is the geographic area to which its work force travels to work.Forty-nine percent of employed residents in LaPorte County commute to jobs located outside of LaPorte County. The top counties where LaPorte county residents commute are Lake County (4,685 workers), Porter County (4,609 workers) and St. Joseph County (3,214 workers).

Labor market

Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

section 04

22,710

Out-Commuters

23,405

Same Work/Home

Commuters ProportionLake, IN 4,685 10.2%Porter, IN 4,609 10.0%St. Joseph, IN 3,214 7.0%Marion, IN 1,614 3.5%Berrien, MI 1,202 2.6%

31

Commuteshed in 2011Labor market

section 04 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

Seventy-five percent of LaPorte County’s working residents are employed either in LaPorte, Lake or Porter Counties. Another 5 percent commute to Cook County, Illinois, or Berrien County, Michigan. An additional 5 percent travel to jobs in St. Joseph or Marion Counties.

Collectively, these seven counties represent 85 percent of the commuteshed for LaPorte County.

32

Laborshed

Commuters ProportionPorter, IN 4,219 10.6%Lake, IN 2,009 5.0%St. Joseph, IN 1,647 4.1%Berrien, MI 897 2.3%Marion, IN 789 2.0%

Labor market

Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)

section 04

16,415

In-Commuters

23,405

Same Work/Home

A county’s laborshed is the geographic area from which it draws employees.Forty-one percent of individuals working in LaPorte County commute from another county for work. Porter County, Indiana, and Lake County, Indiana, are the biggest sources of outside labor for LaPorte County.Forty-eight percent of in-commuters reside in counties adjacent to LaPorte County; however, the fifth largest laborshed county is the Indianapolis metropolitan area (Marion County, Indiana).

33

Laborshed in 2011Labor market

section 04 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD

The bulk (75 percent) of LaPorte County’s workforce

is drawn from LaPorte, Lake, and Porter Counties.

Another 5 percent is drawn from St. Joseph County in

Indiana and Berrien County in Michigan. An additional 5

percent come from Starke and Marion Counties in

Indiana and Cook County in Illinois.

Combined, the eight counties represent 85

percent of LaPorte County’s laborshed.

34

Takeaways LaPorte County’s unemployment rate increased after 2002, swelling to nearly 12 percent by 2009. This increase occurred during the period of the Great Recession (approximately 2008 to 2010). The rate has since been declining. Despite the modest changes in the population over the past decade or more, the county’s labor force has decreased since 2002, indicating that there may be an increasing number of individuals who are unemployed or are discouraged workers (workers who have given up trying to find a job). Employees that work but do not live in LaPorte County tend to commute from surrounding counties. People who commute out of the county for work often travel to other metropolitan areas.

LaPorte County should assess if a major workforce development training effort should be targeted to the growing number of working age adults struggling to find jobs. Furthermore, determining the human capital attributes of workers who commute to jobs outside the county might be insightful. It may provide the information needed to determine how best to reduce the leakage of educated and skilled workers to surrounding counties.

The laborshed and commuteshed data suggest there may be some value in exploring economic and workforce development from a regional (multi-county) basis.

Labor market

section 04

35

Report ContributorsThis report was prepared by the Purdue Center for Regional Development in partnership with Purdue University Extension.

section 04

Data AnalysisIndraneel Kumar, Ph.D.Ayoung Kim

Report AuthorsElizabeth DobisBo Beaulieu, Ph.D.

Report DesignTyler WrightAdeline Jackson

It is the policy of the Purdue University Cooperative Extension Service that all persons have equal opportunity and access to its educational programs, services, activities, and facilities without regard to race, religion, color, sex, age, national origin or ancestry, marital status, parental status, sexual orientation, disability or status as a veteran. Purdue University is an Affirmative Action institution. This material may be available in alternative formats.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Purdue Center for Regional Development (PCRD) . . .seeks to pioneer new ideas and strategies that contribute to regional collaboration, innovation and prosperity.

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.

Please contact

Mary FoellCounty Extension Community Development Educator219-324-9407mfoell@purdue.edu OR