Randy Capps, The Urban Institute

Demographics of Children in Immigrant Families

Demographics of Children in Immigrant Families

“Immigrants and Health Policy:Implications for SCHIP Reauthorization”

Congressional BriefingApril 20, 2007

0

10

20

30

40

1840 1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

Foreign-Born Population (millions)

Percent Foreign-Born of Total

14.8 Percent

35.7 Million(2006)

4.7 Percent12.1 Percent

(2006)

40 Million +(2010)

13 + Percent(2010)

36 Million Immigrants Total:12% of U.S. Population

36 Million Immigrants Total:12% of U.S. Population

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

Children of Immigrants: One in FiveChildren of Immigrants: One in Five

21.6%

6.1%

17.2%

4.4%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Children of Immigrants

Born in U.S.

Foreign-Born

Sources: Urban Institute Tabulations from 2005 CPS, March Demographic and Economic Supplement; 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000 Census Integrated Public Use Microdata Samples (IPUMS).Note: Children of Immigrants have at least one parent born outside the United States. Immigrants exclude individuals born in Puerto Rico.

Share of U.S. Children under Age 18

2/3 of Immigrants Lived in 6 States, 2000

2/3 of Immigrants Lived in 6 States, 2000

Immigration Categories6 Main Destination States (67% of Immigrants in 2000)

But Top 10 States with FastestGrowing F.B. Pops. Are DifferentBut Top 10 States with Fastest

Growing F.B. Pops. Are Different

Immigration Categories

6 Main Destination States (67% of Immigrants in 2000)

Top 10 Growth States 1990-2000 (135-274%)

22 States Grew Faster than “Big 6” from 1990 to 2000

22 States Grew Faster than “Big 6” from 1990 to 2000

Immigration Categories

22 New Growth States (1990-2000 > 91%)

6 Main Destination States (67% of Immigrants in 2000)

Top 10 Growth States 1990-2000 (135-274%)

45%43%

41% 41%

32%

48%

39% 39%

32%34%

SC (1) NH (2) TN (3) AR (4) DE (5) AL (6) GA (7) NE (8) KY (9) NC (10)

Southeast Had 7 of 10 FastestGrowing F.B. Populations, 2000-2005

Southeast Had 7 of 10 FastestGrowing F.B. Populations, 2000-2005

Percent Growth in Foreign-Born Population, 2000-2005

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

US Avg.16%

SOURCE: Migration Policy Institute Data Hub

6%

4% 4%

8%7%

4%3%

9%

2%

6%

SC (1) NH (2) TN (3) AR (4) DE (5) AL (6) GA (7) NE (8) KY (9) NC (10)

But These Fast Growing States HadLow F.B. Population Shares in 2005But These Fast Growing States HadLow F.B. Population Shares in 2005

Percent Growth in Foreign-Born Population, 2000-2005

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

US Avg.12%

SOURCE: Migration Policy Institute Data Hub

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

35.7 Million Foreign-Born(2005 U.S. American Community Survey)

Mexico 11 million

(31%)

Europe, Oceania, and North America

5.9 million (17%)

Africa & West Indies2.8 million (8%)

Other Latin America and Spanish Speaking

Caribbean6.5 million (18%)

Asia 9.5 million

(27%)

U.S.: Half of Immigrants from Latin America (31% Mexico), 1/4 from AsiaU.S.: Half of Immigrants from Latin

America (31% Mexico), 1/4 from Asia

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

37 Million Foreign-Born in 2005(Passel 2006)

Legal permanentresidents (LPR)

(10.5 million) 28%

Legal temporary residents

(1.3 million) 3%

Naturalized citizens(11.5 million) 31%

Refugees(2.6 million) 7%

Unauthorized immigrants(11.1 million) 30%

3 in 10 U.S. Immigrants Are Unauthorized

3 in 10 U.S. Immigrants Are Unauthorized

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

• 1+ Non-Citizen Adults and 1+ Citizen Children

• 9.6 Million U.S. Children

• 13% of all U.S. Children60% of Kids in Immigrant Families 84% of Kids in Non-Citizen Families

• In Legal Immigrant (LPR) Families --86% of Kids are Citizens!!

Mixed Status FamiliesMixed Status Families

(March 2005 Current Population Survey, Imputed)

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

93%

83%

72%

0-5 yrs

6-11 yrs

12-17 yrs

Young Children of Immigrants (0-5) Most Likely to be U.S. Citizens

Young Children of Immigrants (0-5) Most Likely to be U.S. Citizens

(March 2004 Current Population Survey)

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

Children of ImmigrantsIncreasingly Poor

Children of ImmigrantsIncreasingly Poor

12%

23%

32%

42%

42%

9%10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Children of immigrants

White, not Hispanic children*

Percent of K-12 Students in Families Below 100% of Poverty

African-American children*

Source: Van Hook & Fix (2000); Urban Institute tabulations from C2SS PUMS. Excludes Puerto Ricans.

* Includes children of both immigrants and natives.

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

27%37%

10%

4%

7%

6%

10%

22%

29%

13%

Lack healthinsurance coverage

Fair or poor health

Living in crowdedhousing

Rent exceeds halffamily income

Difficulty affordingfood

Children of Immigrants

Children of Natives

Children of Immigrants Have High Levels of Economic Hardship

Children of Immigrants Have High Levels of Economic Hardship

(1999 National Survey of America’s Families)

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

17%

30%

33%0-5 yrs***

6-11 yrs

12-17 yrsLinguistically isolated(No one in householdover age 13 speaksEnglish very well)

1/3 of Young Children of Immigrants (0-5) Linguistically Isolated

1/3 of Young Children of Immigrants (0-5) Linguistically Isolated

(2000 Census, 5 percent PUMS)

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

7%

26%

24%

83%

4%

14%

15%

68%

Received TemporaryAssistance for Needy

Families last year

Received food stampslast year

Receives housingassistance

Had taxes prepared orreceived EITC within

past three years

Immigrant Families

Native Families

(2002 National Survey of America’s Families)

Benefits Use Low in Low-IncomeWorking* Immigrant Families

Benefits Use Low in Low-IncomeWorking* Immigrant Families

* Low-income working families are families with children, incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level, and adults who worked at least 1,000 hours on average in 2001.

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

SCHIP, Medicaid Changes, Outreach Improve AccessSCHIP, Medicaid Changes, Outreach Improve Access

• Outreach: Eligibility rules Public charge, other immigration concerns

• More points of access in the community: Hospitals, clinics, CBOs, e.g.

• Application assistance/pre-screening• Simpler application procedures:

Less verification Mail in, fax, internet applications In-person interviews at offices not required

(2001 Urban Institute study of Medicaid and SCHIP application process in 6 states)

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

  

Application Processing

  

Call Centers

Hos

- pita

ls

Health

Clinics

 

Health Fairs

 

Schools

HealthPlans 

Mail

Welfare/Medicaid Offices 

  

 

CBO

s

(2001 Urban Institute study of Medicaid and SCHIP application process in 6 states)

Medicaid/SCHIP points of access Medicaid/SCHIP points of access

THE URBAN INSTITUTE / Washington, D.C.

• New growth states (e.g., Southeast) have high undocumented shares; population more settled in major immigrant states.

• English proficiency levels also likely lower in new growth states.

• Bilingual capacity also lower in new growth states (but mostly Spanish required).

• More languages, diversity in major states.

• Fiscal capacity lower in most new growth states; higher in major states.

Immigrants’ Kids’ Access to SCHIP May Vary across States

Immigrants’ Kids’ Access to SCHIP May Vary across States

For more information,contact:

Randy CappsImmigration Studies Program

Center on Labor,Human Services, and Population

Urban Institute2100 M St., NW

Washington, DC 20037

Randy CappsImmigration Studies Program

Center on Labor,Human Services, and Population

Urban Institute2100 M St., NW

Washington, DC 20037

rcapps@ui.urban.org(202) 261-5302