Demographic Profile of Senior in Wayne County, Michigan

More documents

Recommendations

Info

in the movement of the elderly have followed those of the general population, as older communities - Detroit, Highland Park, River Rouge, Ecorse, etc. – have lost large numbers of elderly, while newer, growing communities – Brownstown, Canton, Northville and Plymouth townships – have experienced significant gains. The large population losses in Detroit over the period led to a 15.6 percentage point decrease in share for PSA 1-A from 24.9 to 9.3 percent, while movement to the suburbs led to a slight increase of 2.5 percentage points in PSA 1-C’s share from 8.2 to 10.7. In spite of the overall 30-year gain, PSA 1-C experienced its first loss in share during the 1990s. Wayne County and Area Agencies’ Shares of State’s 60+ Population, 1970 - 2000 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Wayne County 1-A 1-C 1970 1980 1990 2000 A special analysis, utilizing the Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) file from the 2000 Census, 1 reveals the migration patterns of Wayne and Monroe County seniors 2 in the second half of the 1990s – between 1995 and 2000. A total of 68,048 persons 60 years and over who resided in Wayne and Monroe counties in 1995 had moved by 2000 (does not include seniors leaving the State of Michigan). Of this total, 45,107, or 66 percent, moved within the Wayne/Monroe area. While we cannot identify specific communities of residence in 1995, we do know that 18,090 (40 percent of movers) were residing in the City of Detroit in 2000, while 27,017 (60 percent of movers) were elsewhere in the twocounty area. The destinations of the 22,941, or 34 percent, who moved out were distributed as follows: 5,491 moved to Oakland County; 4,764 moved to Macomb County; 5,409 moved to the remainder of Southeast Michigan (Lapeer, Lenawee, Livingston, St. Clair and Washtenaw counties); 349 moved to Genesee County; and, 6,366 moved somewhere else in the State of Michigan. 1 PUMS files contain individual records of the characteristics for a 5 percent sample of people and housing units. The data are delivered by Public Use Microdata Areas (PUMAs) – geographic areas containing a minimum population of 100,000 persons. The individual records allow researchers to develop data analyses, such as migration patterns, that are not available in standard census releases. 2 The PUMS migration file identified PUMAs for both 1995 and 2000. The 1995 PUMA area combined Wayne and Monroe counties, while the 2000 PUMAs provided great sub-county detail. Executive Summary to Senior Analysis xii
One component of this tabulation that is discussed in the next section – race - deserves additional discussion in light of the PUMS analysis. While the vast majority of minority seniors (primarily Black) who moved remained in Wayne County (primarily Detroit), a significant number did choose Oakland County as their home. Thirty percent of seniors who moved to Oakland County were non-White. This contrasts with the 6 percent non- White component that moved to Macomb County. Migration Trends of Wayne and Monroe County Seniors Between 1995 and 2000 Total Movers White Black Other Where Did They Go? 45,107 27,244 16,413 1,450 Moved Within Area 18,090 3,151 14,194 745 Detroit 27,017 24,093 2,219 705 Wayne County remainder/Monroe County 22,941 19,572 2,994 375 Moved Out of Area 4,764 4,483 229 52 Macomb County 5,491 3,850 1,532 109 Oakland County 5,971 5,409 522 40 Remainder of Southeast Michigan 349 309 40 0 Flint/Genesee County 6,366 5,521 671 174 State Remainder Wayne County also experienced a 7.7 percentage point drop in its share of the State’s minority elderly over the decade of the 1990s, from 68.1 to 60.4 percent. Once again the driving force was population loss in Detroit which, coupled with increasing numbers of minority elderly in the Detroit suburbs, led to an 8.4 percentage point decrease in PSA 1- A’s share from 62.9 to 54.5 percent, and a 0.7 percentage point increase in PSA 1-C’s share from 5.2 to 5.9 percent. Wayne County and Area Agencies’ Shares of State’s Minority Seniors, 1990 and 2000 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1990 2000 Wayne County 1-A 1-C A detailed look at the composition of this population shows differing shares across groups. While Wayne County accounted for just over 60 percent of Michigan’s total Executive Summary to Senior Analysis xiii
Page 1 and 2: Demographic Profile of Seniors in W
Page 5: Executive Summary A Demographic Pro
Page 9 and 10: In addition to the factors summariz
Page 13 and 14: A Demographic Profile of Seniors in
Page 15 and 16: Total Population Trends Populations
Page 17 and 18: A further analysis of the county’
Page 19 and 20: accounting for just over half the t
Page 21 and 22: Table 11. Share of Wayne County’s
Page 23 and 24: Disability Status The 2000 Census i
Page 25 and 26: out-Wayne County - particularly Dea
Page 27 and 28: Index to Demographic Profile of Sen
Page 29 and 30: The comparison factor, the usual wa
Page 31 and 32: Detroit (sector 2) and in the downt
Page 33 and 34: losses for both, though percentage
Page 35 and 36: The racial/ethnic composition of th
Page 37 and 38: Table 8. Percent of the Population
Page 39 and 40: elow that of 1-C at 11.3 percent, a
Page 41 and 42: Poverty Trends Table 13 allows for
Page 43 and 44: One community that needs to be look
Page 45 and 46: The east side of the City experienc
Page 47 and 48: The largest numerical decrease, 3,0
Page 49 and 50: Table 24. Population 65+ Living in
Page 51 and 52: Table 27 provides data on the total
Page 53 and 54: Table 29. Educational Attainment of
Page 57 and 58:
A Demographic Profile of Seniors in
Page 59 and 60:
Total Population Trends At the Stat
Page 61 and 62:
Minority Population Trends The move
Page 63 and 64:
egions, across all age groups. Only
Page 65 and 66:
Table 9. Population 60 Years+ At or
Page 67 and 68:
Population Trends Region 1-C has ex
Page 69 and 70:
Table 13. Ratio of Income to Povert
Page 71 and 72:
egional average in all age categori
Page 73 and 74:
for 86 percent of group quarters re
Page 75 and 76:
Table 18 provides data on the total
Page 77 and 78:
Table 20. Educational Attainment of
Page 79 and 80:
whether these seniors are owning or
Page 81 and 82:
Conclusions and Recommendations Whi
Page 83 and 84:
TABLE 1. GENERAL POPULATION TRENDS
Page 85 and 86:
TABLE 1. GENERAL POPULATION TRENDS
Page 87 and 88:
TABLE 2. LIVING ARRANGEMENT TRENDS
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Appendix B Wayne County Maps
Page 97 and 98:
Northville Harper Woods Grosse Poin
Page 99 and 100:
96 96 75 10 10 39 39 Telegraph Gran
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Number of Persons 60 Years of Age a
Page 109 and 110:
Percent of Population 60 Years and
Page 111 and 112:
Population 60 Years of Age and Over
Page 113:
Percent of Population 60 Years and
show all

Demographic Profile of Senior in Wayne County, Michigan

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?