American Dream Makers - United Way of Greater Los Angeles

American Dream Makers
Latino Profiles Study Report

United Way
Gold Sponsors
Center for the Study of Latino Health and Culture, UCLA
Kaiser Permanente
The Gas Company:
A Sempra Energy Company
La Opiniόn
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Silver Sponsors
California Endowment
The California Wellness Foundation
Pacific Bell
The James Irvine Foundation
Sponsors
Los Angeles Times
California Community Foundation
Center for the Study of Los Angeles, Loyola Marymount

AMERICAN DREAM MAKERS
LATINO PROFILES STUDY REPORT
January 2000
Sponsored by
Center for the Study of Latino Health and Culture, UCLA
Kaiser Permanente
The Gas Company: A Sempra Energy Company
La Opinion
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
California Endowment
The California Wellness Foundation
Pacific Bell
The James Irvine Foundation
Los Angeles Times
California Community Foundation
Center for the Study of Los Angeles, Loyola Marymount

AMERICAN DREAM MAKERS
LATINO PROFILES STUDY REPORT
JANUARY 2000
David E. Hayes-Bautista, Ph.D.
Marge Nichols
CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF LATINO
UNITED WAY OF
HEALTH AND CULTURE
GREATER LOS ANGELES
with: Maria Hayes-Bautista with: Armando Garcia
Delmy Iñiguez
Deborah Tucker
UCLA School of Medicine
Juan Turcios
924 Westwood Blvd. Suite 730 523 West 6 th Street
Los Angeles, CA 90024 Los Angeles, CA 90014
(310) 794-3095 (213) 630-2100
(310) 794-2862 FAX (213) 630-2124 FAX
www.med.ucla.edu/cesla
www.unitedwayla.org

CONTENTS
Introduction
Latino Profiles Committee
Action Agenda
Statistical Data on Latinos in Los Angeles County
List of Tables
Data Sources
Demographic Profiles
Key Findings
Tables
Building Strong Communities
Key Findings
Tables
Fueling the Economic Engine
Key Findings
Tables
Learning for Life
Key Findings
Latino Internet Resources
Tables
Bibliography on Latinos in Los Angeles County
Introduction
Arts, Culture and Identity
Crime
Demographics and Research Resources
Economics and Business
Education
Elderly
Employment and Labor
Health and Medicine
Immigration
Information Technology and the Internet
Politics
Poverty, Housing and Welfare Reform
Focus Group Report

Survey Data
Survey Methodology
Survey Highlights
Survey Instrument
Call Record and Screener
Order Form

INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
The study was designed with two goals:
•= To promote understanding of trends shaping the future of Los Angeles’ unique
multicultural society by studying its emerging Latino majority
•= To stimulate action by business, government and philanthropic sectors to invest in building
on the strengths of Latino communities in Los Angeles
HOW THE STUDY WAS CONDUCTED
Study Committee
The Latino Profiles Study Committee involved committed top Latino leadership to design the
research, develop the action agenda and communicate study findings to a wide range of audiences.
Focus Groups
Focus groups were used to assess areas for study. During October 1998, a series of 8 focus groups
were conducted by the Center for the Study of Latino Health and Culture at UCLA. The focus
groups consisted of distinctive Latino sub-groups:
•= Immigrants
•= US-born, high school graduates or less
•= US-born, college attendance or more
•= Business leaders
•= Civic leaders
In the focus group format, a series of questions about building strong communities was asked and
conversation about these issues ensued. Sessions were tape recorded and transcripts were used to
analyze results. Focus group findings are presented in Chapter 2, Focus Group Report.
Multi-Ethnic Community Survey
To put issues affecting Latinos in a broader community context, a survey was conducted with
Latinos, African Americans, Asians and Whites to learn how Latinos view themselves and how
other groups perceive Latinos in this crucial transition period. Interviews were conducted in
Spanish and English; budget constraints prohibited interviewing in Asian languages.
Statistical Data
A wide range of statistics were collected and analyzed on trends in population, health, education,
income, employment, housing, immigration and related topics. Data sources included local, state
and federal government sources such as the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services,
California Department of Education and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; private research
institutions such as the Public Policy Institute of California and RAND; and academic sources
such as the University of Southern California.

Bibliography
To identify resources for in-depth information, an bibliography of 450+ entries was compiled on
studies and reports focused on Latinos in Los Angeles County. While the bibliography is not
exhaustive, it provides an overview of the extensive body of research available.
Expert Interviews
Experts in a wide range of fields covered by the study, such as health, education and intergroup
relations were interviewed to obtain insights from researchers and practitioners.
Action Agenda
An essential element of the study was development of an Action Agenda to identify strategies in
the nonprofit sector, public policy, political agenda and media to address problems and build on
strengths in the Latino community. An Action Agenda Conference was held on November 30,
1999 at Loyola Marymount University to hear initial study findings and discuss priorities for the
Action Agenda. Implementation and followup on the Action Agenda will be undertaken by United
Way.
Report Distribution
A 32-page four-color Executive Summary was prepared for wide distribution and
The Executive Summary of the report was presented to the public at a Town Hall luncheon on
January 27, 2000. Copies will be distributed to organizations, individuals, libraries, colleges, the
media and general public, with an outreach strategy designed to communicate to both Latino and
non-Latino audiences. The full study report is available in paper copy and CD ROM, and on the
United Way web site: http://www.unitedwayla.org.

Latino Profiles Committee
David Hayes-Bautista, Ph.D
Co-Chair, Research
UCLA School of Medicine
Mónica Lozano, Chair
Associate Publisher, La Opiniόn
Fernando Guerra, Ph.D
Co-Chair, Policy
Loyola Marymount University
Robert Alaniz
Co-Chair, Communications
Hill and Knowlton
Saeed Ali
Principal Consultant
California Latino Caucus
Susan Alva
Director, Immigration and
Citizenship Project
CHIRLA
Lourdes Baesconde-Garbanati, Ph.D.
Director
Hispanic/Latino Tobacco Education
Network, USC
Hector Barreto
President
Latin Business Association
Desdemona Cardoza, Ph.D.
V.P. for Information Resource
Management
California State University, Los Angeles
Diana DeAnda, Ph.D.
UCLA Department of Social Welfare
Eddie Dominguez
Station Manager
KVEA-Channel 52
Leobardo Estrada, Ph.D.
Urban Planning,
School of Public Policy, UCLA
Ivelisse Estrada
Vice President of Corporate &
Community Affairs
Univision
Oliver Goldsmith, M.D.
Medical Director/Chairman of the Board
Southern California Permanente
Medical Group
Antonio Gonzalez
President
Southwest Voter Research Institute
John Guerra
Regional Public Affairs Manager
The Gas Company
Maria L. Gutierrez
General Manager
KFTV-Channel 21
Pierette Hondagneu-Sotelo, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Sociology, USC
Jack Kyser
Chief Economist
Economic Development Corporation
Alicia Maldonado
Sr. Director of Communications &
Public Policy
MALDEF
Marge Nichols
Director of Research & Evaluation
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Douglas Patiño, Ph.D.
President
California State University Foundation
Jaime Regalado, Ph.D.
Executive Director and Professor
Pat Brown Institute of Public Affairs
Angela Sanbrano
Executive Director
CARECEN
Teresa Sananiego
Director of Public Affairs
KABC-TV
Martha Tapias-Mansfield
Director of Strategic & Latino
Initiatives
Los Angeles Times
Arturo Vargas
Executive Director
NALEO
Louis Velasquez
Hispanic Ministry
Archdiocese of Los Angeles
Valerie Zavala
Vice President of News and
Public Affairs
KCET-TV
United Way Staff
Elise Buik
Senior Vice President,
Marketing & Communications
and Community Investment
Diane Cordova Creyaufmiller
Director of Creative Services
Michel Masuda
Vice President of Community
Investment
Sandy Mendoza
Director of Community
Relations
Todd Rosin
Director of Communications
Helen Torres
Community Investment Officer

Expert Interviews
Rudy Acuña, Ph.D.
Professor of Chicano Studies
CSUN
Reynaldo Baca, Ph.D.
Center for Multilingual, Multicultural Research
USC
Sheriff Lee Baca
Los Angeles County Sheriff
Estela Bensimon, Ph.D.
Associate Dean
Rossier School of Education, USC
Maggie Cervantes
Executive Director
New Economics for Women
Richard Chabran, Ph.D.
Director Center for Virtual Research
UC Riverside
Bert Corona
Executive Director
Hemandad Mexicana Nacional
Senator Martha Escutia
Senator, 30 th District
Leobardo Estrada, Ph.D.
Urban Planning, School of
Public Policy, UCLA
Randy Jurado Ertll
President
Salvadoran American Political Action Committee
Yolie Flores Aguilar
Executive Director
Children’s Planning Council
Fernando Guerra, Ph.D.
Director
Centor for the Study of Los Angeles
Loyola Marymount University
David Hayes-Bautista, Ph.D.
Director
Center for the Study of Latino Health and
Culture, UCLA School of Medicine
Joe R. Hicks
Executive Director
City of Los Angeles
Commission on Human Relations
Jack Kyser
Chief Economist
Los Angeles Economic
Development Corporation
Maritza Mendizabal
Vice President of Volunteer Relations
American Lung Association
Dowell Myers, Ph.D.
School of Policy, Planning & Development
USC
Angela Sanbrano
Executive Director
CARECEN
Arlene M. Sanchez Walsh
Program Coordinator
Center for Religion and Civic Culture
USC
Abel Valenzuela, Ph.D.
Associate Director
Center for the Study of Urban Poverty
UCLA
Ron Wakabayashi
Executive Director
L.A. County Human Relations Commission
Arturo Ybarra
Executive Director
Watts/Century Latino Organization

AMERICAN DREAM MAKERS
ACTION AGENDA
January 2000

Action Agenda
Vision: The Latino Community is informed, involved, an integral part of collective solutions and inclusively leading the Greater Los Angeles area
into a future of social viability and economic strength.
Goals
Build Strong Communities by promoting family strength
and community empowerment through improved:
o
o
o
o
o
access to quality community and health resources
family health
inter-group relations
responsive public and institutional policies
representation in and positive interaction with business,
government and community
Action Strategies
Collaborative Action:
Invest funding and build capacity in culturally responsive, effective and targeted family centers and community services
providing:
o extended hours for child care and afterschool programs
o accessible, affordable health care
Promote partnerships that 1) recruit and increase the number of Latino physicians and 2) train health care professionals
with respect to cultural competence in communication skills and awareness of cultural beliefs concerning health issues
Join with model organizations and programs to promote positive human relations and civic engagement among residents, such
as:
o voter registration and information
o cross-cultural awareness and conflict resolution
Collaboratively define recruitment goals and prospects for increasing full participation of Latinos in influential business,
policy and community networks and associations
Information Action:
o
o
o
Develop better understanding and interpretation of Latinos by the media
Organize community outreach and consumer education strategies with leading organizations and media partners.
Coordinate a Speaker’s Bureau to promote key messages from the American Dream Makers study in business,
education, government and public affairs venues
Policy Action:
Join with local elected officials and community organizations to define and move policy related to the agenda:
o affordable, quality health care and coverage
o citizenship and immigration

Goals
Fuel the “Economic Engine” of the Latino Community through
targeted:
o homeownership programs
o business opportunities, resources and incubator programs
o workforce development training/retraining for the future
marketplace
Action Strategies
Collaborative Action:
o Actively expand and support economic development consortiums that promote:
o small business lending, minority loans and financial services
o quality training, development and mentoring for business owners
o
Join with a range of business and community partners to establish Individual Development Accounts
(IDAs) that promote savings and investment for homeownership, education and business start-up for
families
o
o
Support positioning of Latino leaders strategically within the business arena
Identify and promote workforce skill development and training opportunities that are relevant and
accessible. Explore on-site, workplace opportunities.
Information Action:
o Develop and distribute a resource guide that addresses the needs of growing Latino businesses collaboratively
with partner organizations
Policy Action:
o Join with local elected officials and community organizations to define and advocate policy related to
the agenda:
o effective economic development policies targeted towards Latinos
o expanded policies on diversity
o employer incentives for training and development

Promote Life-Long Learning as a priority for children and
adults through increasing:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
parent empowerment
healthy development in young children
educational achievement (primary and higher)
acquisition of the English language
cultural competence in education
access to technology
attainment information and skills for quality living
Collaborative Action
o Promote community-based partnerships that support achievement of school-age and adult students through
activities such as tutoring, mentoring and outreach as well as those demonstrating cultural competence and
addressing barriers (i.e. expanded hours, child care, etc)
o Facilitate quality information and outreach to students and their families about preparing for college and resources
available to support achievement
o Explore avenues to expand community schools that offer a range of opportunities for children and parents
o Explore a partnership to 1) recruit and increase the number of bi-lingual/bi-cultural teachers and 2) train teachers
with respect to cultural competence in communication skills and awareness of cultural beliefs concerning family
and education
Information Action
o Join with parent associations and other networks that reach parents to communicate practical life information for
their personal and family growth
o Explore opportunities to optimize the use of and partnership with Spanish language media
Policy Action
o Increase outreach to provide; information on educational resources and opportunities to the under-served Latino
community
o Join with local elected officials and community organizations to define and advocate policy related to the agenda:
o expanded financial assistance for college
o accountable allocation of resources
o potential to tap into talents of foreign-trained professionals
This Action Agenda is the convergence of the data, survey and focus group findings with the vision of the leadership who participated in the Action Agenda
Conference. This agenda was developed to provide a focus that can translate to action. United Way of Greater Los Angeles is committed to focusing our
energy and resources. Collaboratively, with a common vision, we will move our action agenda forward by engaging people and institutions in every arena:
business, political, non-profit, religious, educational, and media. We will involve more parents and families, and partner with foundations and public
agencies that share in the vision for a stronger Los Angeles. United Way welcomes your help and participation. Please call (213) 630-2812 if you would like
to adopt a segment of the Action Agenda or to be a part of this American Dream.

Latino Profiles Action Agenda
Conference Attendees
Jamie Pacheo-Orozco
Project Director of
Creative Communities Project
USC Studies Center
Mary Ann Pascua
Nursing Coordinator
Greater Hollywood Health Partnership
Douglas Patino, Ph.D.
President
California State University Foundation
Liliana Perez
Field Deputy
Assemblyman Antonio Villaraigosa
Margaret Quiones, Ph.D.
President
Santa Monica/Malibu School Board
Patricia Ramos
Communications Manager
KMEX-TV, Channel 34
Jamie Regalado, Ph.D.
Executive Director
Pat Brown Institute of Public Affairs
Todd Rosin
Director of Communications
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Mary Salinas-Duron
Vice President, Fair Lending Markets Division
Countywide Home Loan
Teresa Samaniego
Director of Public Affairs
KABC-TV
Angela Sanbrano
Executive Director
CARECEN
Karime Sanchez Bradvica
Executive Director, External Affairs
PacBell
Barbara Sandoval
Deputy Director
Fannie Mae Partnership Office
Marian Shima
Director of Public Affairs
Los Angeles Times
Rita Speck
Government Relations Officer
Kaiser Permanente
Robert Stein, Ph.D.
Associate Director
Center for the Study of Latino
Health and Culture, UCLA
Martha Tapias-Mansfield
Director of Strategic & Latino Initiatives
Los Angeles Times
Helen Torres
Community Investment Officer
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Fernando Torres-Gil, Ph.D.
Associate Dean
School of Public Policy, UCLA
Juan Turcios
Coordinator Funding & Evaluation
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Steve Valenzuela
Executive Vice President
Los Angeles Community
Development Bank
Arturo Vargas
Executive Director
NALEO
Ron K. Wakabayashi
Executive Director
Los Angeles County Commission on
Human Relations
David Walkley
Manager, Human Resources
ARCO Products Company
Valerie Zavala
Vice President of News and Public Affairs
KCET-TV

Latino Profiles Action Agenda
Conference Attendees
Gisselle Acevedo-Franco
Director, Corp Communications
& Public Affairs
Media One
Robert Alaniz
Managing Director
Hill and Knowlton
Susan Alva
Director
Immigration and Citizenship Project
CHIRLA
Rosina M. Becerra, Ph.D.
Social Welfare/Center for Child
& Family Policy Studies, UCLA
Estela Maria Bensimon, Ph.D.
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Elise Buik
Senior Vice President
Marketing & Communications and
Community Investment
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Miguel Bustos
Director, Community Outcomes
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Tom Chabolla
Executive Director
Office of Justice & Peace
Archdiocese of Los Angeles
Alan Clayton
Director of Equal Opportunity
L.A. Chicano Employees Assocation
Gloria Curiel
Law Offices of Curiel & Parker
Ignacio De la Torre
Director, External Affairs
Pacific Bell
Mary Jean Duran
Director, Diversity
Disneyland
John Echeveste
Partner
Valencia, Pérez & Echeveste
Leobardo Estrada, Ph.D.
Urban Planning
School of Public Policy, UCLA
Ivelisse Estrada
Vice President of Corporate
& Community Affairs
Univision
Ana Figueroa-Davis
District Director
Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard
Yolie Flores-Aguilar
Executive Director
Children’s Planning Council
Susan Fuentes
Director
Greater Hollywood Health Partnership
Gil Garcetti
District Attorney
City of Los Angeles
Rafael Gonzalez
Executive Director
Public Allies
Fernando J. Guerra, Ph.D.
Director
Center for the Study of Los Angeles
Loyola Marymount University
Maria L. Gutierrez
General Manager
KFTV-Channel 21
Joseph V. Haggerty
President
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
David Hayes-Bautista, Ph.D.
Director
Center for the Study of Latino Health
and Culture, UCLA School of Medicine
Antonia Hernandez
General Counsel
MALDEF
Randall Hernandez
Vice President, Government Affairs
Bank of America
Pierette Hondagneu-Sotelo, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Sociology, USC
Melanie Lee
Community Investment Officer
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Sally Lew
Program Officer
The James Irvine Foundation
Mari Lopez
Director of Civic Education
NALEO
Mónica Lozano
Associate Publisher
La Opinión
Michel Masuda
Vice President, Community Investment
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Alicia Maldonado
Sr. Director of Communications
& Public Policy
MALDEF
Jairo Marin
News Director
KMEX-TV
Sand Mendoza
Director, Community Relations
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Henry Mendoza
Executive Director
Navidad en El Barrio
Marge Nichols
Director of Research & Evaluation
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
Hector Orci
Co-Chairman
La Agencia de Orci & Asociados
Norma Orci
Co-Chairman and Creative Officer
La Agencia de Orci & Asociados

STATISTICAL DATA
on
Latinos in Los Angeles County
January 2000

List of Tables
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
POPULATION
1.01 Race/Ethnic Groups,1920-2040
1.02 Race/Ethnic Population Estimate by Zip Code, 1999
1.03 Race/Ethnic Groups by Los Angeles County Service Planning Areas (SPAs), 1998
Map Latino Population Los Angeles County, 1998
1.04 Latino Ethnic Groups, 1990, 1998-1999
1.05 Latino Population Profile, 1990
1.06 Argentinean Population Profile, 1990
1.07 Central American Population Profile, 1990
1.08 Chilean Population Profile, 1990
1.09 Colombian Population Profile, 1990
1.10 Costa Rican Population Profile, 1990
1.11 Cuban Population Profile,1990
1.12 Dominician Population Profile, 1990
1.13 Ecuadorian Population Profile, 1990
1.14 Guatemalan Population Profile, 1990
1.15 Honduran Population Profile, 1990
1.16 Mexican Population Profile, 1990
1.17 Nicaraguan Population Profile, 1990
1.18 Panamanian Population Profile, 1990
1.19 Peruvian Population Profile, 1990
1.20 Puerto Rican Population Profile, 1990
1.21 Salvadoran Population Profile, 1990
1.22 South American Population Profile, 1990
1.23 Venezuelan Population Profile, 1990
1.24 All Other Hispanic Origin Population Profile, 1990
1.25 Age Structure and Median Age Trends by Race/Ethnic Group, 1960-1998
1.26 Age Structure - Latino, 1960-2040
CHILDREN AND YOUTH
1.27 Ethnic Children's Score Card 1999
1.28 Children Living with Parents, 1998, 1999 Average
1.29 Children’s Family Type by Race/ Ethnic Group, 1990
1.30 Youth Age 16-19, Working or Enrolled in School, 1990
1.31 Youth Poverty by Race/Ethnic Group, 1970-1998
1.32 Children's Services Caseload by Race/Ethnic Group, 1999
1.33 Child Abuse & Neglect Caseload Characteristics, 1996
1.34 Child Abuse Deaths Characteristics of Victims, 1984-1997
1.35 HIV Positive Children by Transmission Category and Race/Ethnic Group, 1998
1.36 Accidental Child Deaths by Cause by Race/Ethnic Groups, 1997
1.37 Youth Homicide by Race/Ethnic Group, 1980-1996

ELDERLY
1.38 Elderly Population by Race/Ethnic Group, 1960-1998
1.39 Elderly Population by Race/Ethnic and Age Groups, 1998
1.40 Educational Attainment - Elderly, by Race/Ethnic Group, 1990
1.41 Elderly Below Poverty Level by Race/Ethnic Group, 1970-1997
1.42 Labor Force Participation of Older Persons by Race/Ethnic Group, 1990
1.43 Living Arrangements of Elderly by Race/Ethnic Group, 1990
IMMIGRATION AND LANGUAGE
1.44 Foreign-Born Persons by Place of Birth, 1990
1.45 Immigrants Admitted by Year and Major Category of Admission, 1990-1998
1.46 Citizenship Status, All Ages, 1998-1999
1.47 Citizenship Status of Adults, 1994, 1996, 1998
1.48 Immigration And Naturalization, by Country of Region, 1997
1.49 Latino Income Level by Citizenship Status
1.50 Latino Language Use, 1999
1.51 Language Spoken at Home by Zip Code, 1990
BUILDING STRONG COMMUNITIES
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
2.1 Public Opinion Poll Data on Community Issues, 1999
BIRTHS AND DEATHS
2.2 Births by Child’s Race/Ethnic Group, 1970-1997
2.3 Birth Characteristics by Mother’s Race/Ethnic Group, 1997
2.4 Birth Characteristics by Zip Codes, 1996
2.5 Leading Causes of Death by Race/Ethnic Group, 1997
2.6 Years of Potential Life Lost By Cause of Death and Race/Ethnic Groups 1997
2.7 Homicide Deaths, Age 0-19 by Race/Ethnicity and Gender, 1990-1994
2.8 Motor Vehicule Crash Deaths, Age 0-19
2.9 Suicide Deaths, Age 0-19
HEALTH
2.10 Physician to Population Ratio, Latino and Non-Latino, 1999
2.11 Child Nutrition Indicators by Race/Ethnic Group, 1997
2.12 Preschool Children Fully Immunized, 1990-1999
2.13 Persons with No Health Care Insurance, 1985-1997
2.14 Mental Health Departmet Clients by Race/Ethnic Group and Primary Language, 1997-1998
2.15 Cases of Selected Notifiable Diseases by Race/Ethnic Group, 1997
2.16 Tuberculosis Cases by Age Group and Race, 1986-1997
2.17 AIDS Cases Reported by Race/Ethnic Group and Gender, 1991-1998
2.18 Los Angeles Health Survey Findings, 1997
CRIME
2.19 Arrests by Race/Ethnic Group, Adult and Juvenile, 1998
2.20 Juveniles Supervised by California Youth Authority by Race/Ethnic Group, 1999

FAMILIES
2.21 Household/Family Type by Race/Ethnic Group, 1990
FUELING ECONOMIC ENGINE
BUSINESS
3.01 Public Opinion Poll Data on Financial Issues, 1999
3.02 Minority and Women-Owned Businesses, 1972-1998
3.03 Latino-Owned Firms by City, 1987, 1992, 1998
3.04 Latino Firms by Industry, 1998
3.05 Hispanic-Owned Firms by Ethnicity, 1992
LABOR FORCE
3.06 Employment and Labor Force Participation by Race/Ethnic Group, 1970-1998-1999
3.07 Labor Force Participation by Sex and Ethnic Group, 1990-1999
3.08 Occupation by Race/Ethnic Group, 1998
3.09 Public and Private Sector Employment, Three Year Average Estimates, 1996-1998
3.10 Workers in Family by Race/Ethnic Group, 1990
3.11 Women with Children by Labor Force Status by Race/Ethnic Group, 1990
3.12 Poverty Rate by Race/Ethnic Group, 1990-1999
3.13 Latinos Below Poverty Level by Age Group, 1997
3.14 Poverty and Citizenship Status BY Race/Ethnic Group, 1998, 1999
3.15 Poverty by Race/Ethnic Group, 1970-1998
3.16 Public Assistance Recipient Characteristics: Ethnicity, Citizenship and Language, 1999
3.17 Public Assistance Recipient Latino and Non-Latino, January 1998 - September 1999
INCOME
3.18 Household Income by Race/Ethnic Group, 1998
3.19 Family Income by Ethnic Group in Quartiles, 1999
3.20 Savings or Investments for Households with Income of $25,000 or More, 1995
3.21 Household Income by Race/Ethnic Group, 1990
3.22 Per Capita Income Trends by Race/Ethnic Group, 1980-1990
3.23 Ratio of Income to Poverty Level by Race/Ethnic Group, 1970-1999
HOUSING
3.24 Home Ownership by Race/Ethnic Group, 1990-1998
3.25 FHA Loans by Race/Ethnic Group, 1990-1999
3.26 Housing Characteristics, 1995
3.27 Housing Quality Indicators, Latino Occupied Units, 1995
3.28 Housing Costs, 1995
LIFE-LONG LEARNING
EDUCATION
4.01 Teachers by Race/Ethnic Group, 1982-1998
4.02 Public School Enrollment by Race/Ethnic Group, 1970-1998
4.03 Private and Public School Enrollment Trends, 1985-1998
4.04 Limited English Proficient Students in Public Schools, 1984-1998

EDUCATION - Continued
4.05 Spanish Speaking Students by Grade Level and English Proficiency, 1998-1999
4.06 High School Graduation Rate by Race/Ethnicity, 1981-1998
4.07 High School Graduates with U.C. Required Courses, by Race/Ethnic Group, 1987-1998
4.08 College Going Rate by Race/Ethnic Group, 1989-1998
4.09 College and University Enrollment by Race/Ethnic Group, 1995-1998
4.10 Adult Educational Attainment, Latino and Non-Latino, 1996-1999
4.11 Educational Attainment of Adults by Race/Ethnic Group, 1996,1999
INTERGROUP RELATIONS
4.12 Hate Crimes-Victims, 1990-1998
4.13 Hate Crimes Victmis: Perpetrator Correlations, 1998
4.14 Sexual Hate Crimes, 1998
4.15 Religious Hate Crime, 1990-1998
COMPUTER USE
4.16 Home Computer Ownership by Race/Ethnic Group, 1998
4.17 Children Computer Use at School, 1998
4.18 Internet Use at Home

Data Sources
California Department of Education, California Basic Educational Data System.
California Department of Finance, 2000-2040 population estimates.
California Department of Health Services, Children’s Medical Services Branch.
California Department of Justice, Criminal Justice Statistics Center, California Creiminal Hustice Profile, Los Angeles
County (Annual).
California Highway Patrol.
California Postsecondary Educational Commission.
California Youth Authority.
Claritas, 1998 population estimate.
David E. Hayes- Bautista, Center for the Study of Latino Health, UCLA School of Medicine, “The Latino Physician
Shortage in California 1999,” 1999.
Federal Housing Administration, Santa Ana Homeownership Center.
L.A. County Human Relations Commission.
Latino Business Association “Latino Business Dynamics: A 1998 Portrait,” 1999.
Los Angeles County Chief Administrative Office, Urban Research Division, 1997 poverty estimate.
Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Acute Communicable Disease Control, Pediatric Spectrum of
Disease 1998 Year-End Summary Report.
Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Child Health and Disability Prevention Program.
Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Disease Control Programs, 1997 Communicable Disease
Morbidity Report.
Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Health Assessment and Epidemiology.
Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Health Assessment and Epidemiology, L.A. County Health
Survey, 1997.
Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, HIV Epidemiology Program.
Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Immunization Program, Annual Kindergarten Retrospective
Survey (Annual).
Los Angeles Country Department of Health Services, Violence and Injury Prevention Program, Pediatric Injury
Mortality Report, 1990-1994.
Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health, Planning Division.
Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services.

Los Angeles County Interagency Council on Child Abuse and Neglect (ICAN), Data Analysis Report (Annual).
Los Angeles County Interagency Council on Child Abuse and Neglect (ICAN), Child Death Report (Annual).
Los Angeles County Office of Education, The Condition of Public Education in Los Angeles County, 1996.
Los Angeles Department of Children & Family Services.
Public Policy Institute of California, PPIC Statewide Survey, September 1999.
State of California, Department of Finance, Legal Immigration to California by County: Federal Fiscal Year 1990-
1995.
The Gallup Organization, Inc., 1999 Gallup Poll of Media Usage & Consumer Behavior – Los Angeles Market,
Copyright 1999.
U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey Voting and Registration Supplement, 1994, 1996, 1998.
U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement, 1992-1999.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Housing Survey, Los Angeles-Long Beach Metropolitan Area, 1995.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Businesses, Minority-Owned Business Enterprises, 1972, 1977, 1982, 1987,
1992.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population, 1920, 1930, 1940, 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990.
U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, I.N.S. Statistical Yearbook (Annual).
UCLA Center for Health Policy Research.

DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE

DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE: Key Findings
The size, race, age and sex composition, growth trends of the population are the fundamental
building blocks of communities. This section highlights population trends and characteristics,
focusing on children, the elderly, immigration and language
POPULATION
•= Latinos are the county’s largest ethnic group, with a 1998 population of 4,135,000 or 44%
of county residents. (Table 1.01)
•=
By 2010 Latinos are expected to 51% of the population according to State Department of
Finance estimates, with continued growth to 64% of the population by 2040. (Table 1.01)
Latino Population Growth 1960-2040
P opulation
10,000,000
9,000,000
8,000,000
7,000,000
6,000,000
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
0
1960 1970 1980 1990 1998 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
•=
o
o
o
Rapid growth of the Latino population is due to a combination of high immigration of young
adults, births to this large population group, and a Latino birth rate which is more than double
that of non-Latinos.
Latinos live in all areas of the county, with the greatest concentration in the central L.A. basin,
Harbor area, San Fernando and West San Gabriel Valleys. Zip code 90201 (Bell-Bell
Gardens-Cudahy) has the highest Latino population at 96,000. In a number of areas with
traditionally high concentrations of Latinos, their percent of the population is over 95%. (Table
1.02)
Areas with the lowest percentages of Latino population include much of the west side of the
county from Palos Verdes to Malibu, the east side of Long Beach, northern Glendale and La
Canada Flintridge.
Paradoxically, the expansion of Latinos throughout many areas of the county has not resulted
in a decline of segregation: the great increase in immigration during the ‘70s and ‘80s
increased the density of Latino populations, resulting in less contact with Whites and more

contact with other Latinos in day-to-day interactions, as documented by Vilma Ortiz in Ethnic
Los Angeles (Waldinger and Bozorgmehr, 1996).
Latino Diversity
o
Immigration from Central and South America greatly expanded Latino diversity: by 1980 the
Mexican origin population decreased to 76% of all Latino, Salvadorans, Guatemalans and
Central Americans were 11%, South Americans were 4% and others of Hispanic, 6%.
Latin American Origins - 1998-99
Mexican
Central/South
American
Other Hispanic
o
As of 1998-99 the Mexican origin population was still about 76%, with Central and South
Americans totaling 21% and other Hispanics at 4%. It is likely that a significant proportion of
those reported as “Other Hispanic” in 1990 were counted as Central/South American in the
later estimate.
Latino Ethnic Group Profiles
Tables 1.05 through 1.24 detail the characteristics of 17 national origin groups in Los Angeles,
such as Mexican, Cuban and Nicaraguan. Summary tables show totals for Latinos, Central
Americans, South Americans and all other Hispanics. Data for these profiles is from the 1990
census and while quite dated, provides some indication of similarities and differences among Latin
American Groups. The profiles are organized alphabetically, from Argentinean to Venezuelan.
The following topics are included in each profile:
Population Growth Immigration Community with largest population
Age Language Education – Adults
Employment Occupation Income
Housing Family type Poverty status

Latino and Non-Latino Age Structure, 1988
Age
75-79
60-64
45-49
30-34
15-19
0-4
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
Latino
Latino
75-79
60-64
45-49
30-34
15-19
0-4
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
Non-Latino
Non-Latino
Young Latino Population – but Growing Older
o
o
Latinos have the youngest population of Los Angeles race/ethnic groups with a median age in
1998 of 27.2, compared to 30.9 for African Americans, 33.6 for Asians and more than 37.0 for
Whites. This is due to a larger population of children and youth, as well as a lower proportion
of elderly than other groups. However the median age for Latinos has been rising steadily
since 1980 at a rate similar to that for other ethnic groups (Table 1.25).
The Latino age structure graph for 1998 is broad at the base, showing the high percentage of
young children and a bulge in the 25-39 age group, representing the large immigrant
population plus the trailing edge of U.S. born Latinos of the Baby Boom generation. It tapers
sharply at the top due to the small percentage of older adults.
o The Non-Latino age structure graph shows the characteristic Baby Boom bulge at ages 35-55.
While it narrows at the top it shows a much larger percentage of elderly, and is considerably
narrower at the bottom with a smaller percentage of children and teens than seen in the graph
for Latinos.

o A closer look at Latino population growth and age structure from 1960 to 2040 (Table 1.26)
using State Department of Finance data, shows the following trends:
o Tremendous growth in size of the Latino population, from 577,000 in 1960 to 4.5
million in 2000, with a projection of 8.9 million by 2040
o
o
o
Increase in the Latino percent of total county population from 10% in 1960 to 46% in
2000, rising to 64% of county residents by 2040
54% of Latinos were under age 25 in 1960 during the Baby Boom, declining to 48% in
2000. About 30% of non-Latinos are in this age group.
4% of Latinos were age 65 and over in 1960, rising gradually to 6% in 2000. 15% of
non-Latinos are 65 and over. The Latino elderly will become a much larger component
of the county’s total 65+ population in future years, but will remain a relatively low
percentage within the Latino population.

CHILDREN AND YOUTH
Latino Children’s Score Card
The Latino Children’s Score Card uses the same format as the Los Angeles County Children’s
Score Card, developed for the County Children’s Planning Council. Instead of showing multi-year
trends for each of the measures, this score card shows data for children of each race/ethnic group
to assess their standing on measures of well-being in terms of the goals of Good Health, Safety and
Survival, Economic Well-Being, Social and Emotional Well-Being and Education/ Workforce
Readiness. The column for Latino children is shown in bold. (Table 1.27)
Child Population: Latino children are 57% of the county’s children and youth, and account for
62% of births.
Good Health: While somewhat low in percentage of births with early prenatal care, Latinos have
favorable rates for births at normal weight and infant deaths. Teen births are very high, with
Latinas accounting for 80% of teen births, although they are about 55% of the 15-17 age group.
67% of Latino children have health care coverage, much lower than children in other groups. 60%
of Latino preschoolers are estimated to be fully immunized by 24 months, a rate which has been
improving over the past decade. On nutritional indicators based on Child Health and Disability
Prevention program examinations for low-income children, Latino children show good rates for
normal growth (height and weight) and have a comparatively good rate for anemia, but are
somewhat higher than other groups for obesity and its potentially dangerous lifelong consequences
especially in terms of risk factors for diabetes. Latino children are not disproportionately high in
incidence of tuberculosis or AIDS, but the child death rate is somewhat higher than Asian and
White youth, although far below the rate for African Americans.
Safety and Survival: Latino are lower than their proportion of total youth (57%) in the child abuse
and neglect caseload of the Department of Children’s and Family Services, including all categories
of service from initial investigation (Emergency Response) to Permanent Placement. The arrest
rate for violent felony offenses for Latino youth is almost double the rate for Whites, but less than
1/3 of the rate for African American youth. Latinos are about half of the youth incarcerated by the
California Youth Authority. The accidental death rate for Latino youth is moderate, but they show
a much higher homicide rate than Asians and Whites, although less than half the rate for African
Americans.
Economic Well-Being: Latino children have by far the highest poverty rate, with 43% of children
in families below the poverty level. 74% of the county’s poor children are Latinos, indicating
probable future difficulties as a result of families lacking money for many of the opportunities
which can enrich childhood and promote learning and good health.
Social and Emotional Well-Being: 70% of Latino children are in two-parent families, contrary to
the urban underclass stereotype of largely female-headed families. 26% live in one-parent families
and 4% do not live with their parents. Latino youth have the county’s lowest rate of suicide based
on 5 years of data collected by the County Health Department. Latino children are very

underrepresented in the caseload of the Mental Health Department, accounting for only 20% of
children served. Barriers to needed mental health services may include language, unfamiliarity
with the service, cultural perceptions about mental illness, and lack of access due to immigration
status.
Education/Workforce Readiness: 58% of children in public schools are Latinos. 54%
of Latino children are fluent in English or bilingual, while 46% are limited in English proficiency,
posing a barrier to achievement as they move through the educational system. Latinos are
underrepresented among high school graduates at 46% of the Class of ’98. Latino youth are much
more likely than Asians or Whites to drop out of high school, and following tightening of
graduation requirements in 1998, the graduation rate for Latino youth slipped from 53% to 50%.
Rates of preparation for college admission are very uneven among ethnic groups, and Latinos have
among the lower rates of taking college prep classes. Nevertheless, 40% of Latinos in the Class of
’98 enrolled in state-supported colleges, largely at community college campuses. (Data on college
completion are not available due to difficulty in tracking transfers from community colleges and
other schools. Latinos were 32% of the graduates from California State University campuses in
L.A. County in 1998.)
Status of School Dropouts
•= As shown in Table 1.30, 27% of older Latino teens (age 16-19) were reported in the 1990
census as school dropouts: they were not high school graduates and not enrolled in high school
or college. The dropout rate for White youth was 19%, for Asians, 10% and for African
Americans, 25%. (Table 1.30)
•=
47% of Latino dropouts were employed, the highest employment level for dropouts of all
ethnic groups. 14% of Latino dropouts were looking for work and 39% were “idle,” or not
productively occupied. (Some of these would be teen mothers who were at home caring for
their children and a small proportion would be disabled youth.) This is about the same as the
“idle” rate for White youth, but much lower than the rate of 62% for African Americans.
(Table 1.31)
Latino Children in Poverty
•=
43% of Latino children are in families below the poverty level in 1998, the highest rate for any
ethnic group. The poverty rate for Latino children has increased because many are in recent
immigrant families who are in the lowest economic bracket, and also because recent poverty
estimates use methods which correct for the undercount in the 1990 census. Child poverty
rates are 33% for African Americans, 21% for Asians, 33% for American Indians and 13% for
Whites. (Table 1.31)

Pediatric HIV/AIDS Transmission
•=
Latino children under 13 who have been diagnosed with HIV/AIDS are much less likely to
have been infected before birth due to maternal IV drug use. Only 10% of Latino pediatric
HIV/AIDS cases were the result of IV drug use, compared to 32% of African American and
41% of Whites. 47% of Latino cases were known to be due to heterosexual transmission to the
mother, compared to 39% for Whites and 24% for African Americans. (Table 1.35)
ELDERLY
•=
22% of the county’s elderly (65+) population are Latinos. The proportion of Latino elderly has
risen rapidly, up from 10% in 1980 and 15% in 1990. (Table 1.38)
•= The elderly are a much smaller proportion of all Latinos than in other ethnic groups: only 5%
of Latinos are 65 and over, compared to a county average of 10% and 18% of Whites who are
age 65 and over. (Table 1.39)
•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
Few Latino elderly are in the oldest age groups. Only 1% of Latinos are age 80 or older,
compared to the county average of 3%. (Table 1.39)
Half of Latino elderly completed less than 9th grade, suggesting a special need for advocacy
and/or assistance with the often difficult procedures for obtaining benefits to which senior
citizens are entitled, as well as protection against fraud targeting the elderly. (Table 1.40)
19% of Latino elderly are below the poverty level in a 1997 estimate, compared to a county
average of 13%. Poverty rates for the elderly are much lower than for younger age groups due
to income supports available to senior citizens. (Table 1.41)
18% of the Latino elderly were estimated to be below the poverty level in 1997, compared to
10% to 14% for elderly in other ethnic groups. Similar to the overall trend, the poverty rate for
Latino elderly increased since 1990. (Table 1.41)
The pattern of labor force participation for older workers is counterintuitive: it might be
anticipated that due to lower incomes during their working life, older Latinos might need to
continue working after the typical retirement age of 65. Such is not the case: neither Latino
males nor females have labor force participation rates higher than the county average, and in
fact at age 65-69 their rates are considerably lower. Instead, White males, who have the
highest incomes, have higher rates of working past retirement age. This may be a result of
their greater representation in occupations which are less physically demanding and may offer
the possibility of part-time work after retirement.
A high percentage of Latino elderly, 98% of those age 60 and older, live in households rather
than in retirement or nursing homes, compared to 95% of Whites. Caring for the elderly in the

family home is a strong cultural preference, and the lower rate of living in facilities for the
elderly may also reflect the lower incomes of many Latino families. (Table 1.43)
IMMIGRATION AND LANGUAGE
Immigration
1,697,354 Los Angeles residents counted in the 1990 census were born in Latin America,
including 1.2 million from Mexico, 48,000 from the Caribbean, 396,000 from Central America
and 87,000 from South America. Latinos are more than half of all foreign born residents in
Los Angeles County. (Table 1.44)
The flow of legal immigrants has slowed since a peak in 1993 when 99,000 were admitted to the
U.S. with the intention to reside in Los Angeles County. 59,600 came into the county in 1998,
9% of total U.S. immigration. (Table 1.45)
•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
70% of L.A. County immigrants in 1996, 46,000 persons, were family members of earlier
immigrants.
64% of county residents of all ages are U.S. born citizens, 11% are naturalized citizens and
25% are not U.S. citizens, based on the 1998-99 average of data from the federal Current
Population Survey.
49% of the county’s Latino residents are U.S. born, 12% are naturalized and 39% are not U.S.
citizens. Latinos have a much lower naturalization rate than Asians: while lowest (33%) in
percentage of U.S. born citizens, 34% of Asian residents are naturalized U.S. citizens. (Table
1.47)
Latino naturalization increased dramatically since 1994 when Proposition 187, designed to
limit access to public services to U.S. citizens, was passed by California voters. In 1994 only
7% of Latino adults were naturalized. The naturalization rate of Latino adults rose to 11% in
1996 and 15% in 1998, according to Current Population Survey data. Over the same period
the non-Latino adult naturalization rate increased from 9% of adults to 13%.
1997 naturalization records show that Mexico led the list of countries of origin of persons
naturalized in L.A. County with 31,943 becoming citizens as well as 7,452 from El Salvador
and 3,218 from Guatemala. (Table 1.48)
One reason for the low Latino income levels is that many are recent immigrants who are not
yet established economically. A 1999 estimate of Latino income levels shows that incomes are
very similar for U.S. born and naturalized residents, while non-citizens have a lower income
distribution. 65% of non-citizens are in households with incomes under $25,000 compared to
52% for citizens. At the upper end of the income scale, 9% of U.S. born citizens have incomes
of $75,000 or more compared to 4% of non-citizens. (Table 1.49)

•=
The Southern California Immigration Project conducted at the University of Southern
California School of Urban Planning and Development (1995 to 1997) produced important
findings on trends in upward mobility of immigrants in terms of occupations, income,
homeownership, English proficiency and other factors. The study found that with increasing
length residence in the U.S., immigrants advanced in:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Becoming naturalized U.S. citizens
Improved English proficiency
Occupations with better pay and opportunities
Higher income
Lower poverty rate
Less use of public transportation and more car ownership
More homeownership
Moving to better areas out of the central city
•=
•=
The continuing high rates of poverty in immigrant communities, in spite of immigrants’
upward mobility, is due to continuous arrival of new immigrants who are starting at the
bottom. Therefore, it is important to recognize that persistent high poverty levels in gateway
communities may not indicate inability of immigrants to progress, but just the opposite: those
who succeed move up and out.
The Immigration Project showed that the factors of economic restructuring (fewer well-paid
jobs in manufacturing) and recession seriously slowed movement of immigrants out of
poverty, so that the promise of progress may not be realized for later arrivals unless the
region’s economic health continues.
Language
•=
•=
•=
•=
85% of Latino adults in L.A. County can read or speak Spanish to some degree. 54% are
fluent in both Spanish and English according to 1999 Gallup survey results. (Table 1.50)
Of those who read Spanish, 64% rate their reading knowledge of Spanish as good to excellent
but only 49% reported English reading skills at that level. Fair to poor reading ability was
reported by 36% for Spanish and 49% for English. 3% said they cannot read English. (Table
1.50)
About 44% of Latino adults prefer Spanish only or Spanish more than English for both reading
and speaking, while about 40% prefer English more than Spanish or both languages equally.
20% prefer English only for reading and 14% for speaking. (Table 1.50)
Latino adults tend to use English more away from home, with 31% reporting that they use
English more than Spanish or English only (18%). A total of 43% say that they speak Spanish
only or Spanish more than English away from home. (Table 1.50)

•=
At home, 2/3 of Latinos use Spanish: 34% speak Spanish only at home and 32% speak
Spanish more than English, while 5% use both equally. 29% use English predominantly at
home, with 19% reporting that they use English more than Spanish and 10% use English only.
(Table 4.05)

Table 1.01 RACE/ETHNIC GROUPS
Los Angeles County, 1920-2040
Race/Ethnic Group
Year Total %
African
American %
American
Indian %
Asian
Pacific % White % Other % Latino %
1920 936,455 100.0 18,738 2.0 281 0.0 22,502 2.4 752,330 80.3 427 0.0 142,177 15.2
1930 2,208,492 100.0 46,425 2.1 997 0.0 38,962 1.8 1,949,882 88.3 5,202 0.2 167,024 7.6
1940 2,785,643 100.0 75,209 2.7 1,378 0.0 42,196 1.5 2,470,022 88.7 6,818 0.2 190,020 6.8
1950 4,151,687 100.0 217,881 5.2 1,671 0.0 51,366 1.2 3,590,330 86.5 2,825 0.1 287,614 6.9
1960 6,038,771 100.0 461,546 7.6 8,109 0.1 108,722 1.8 4,877,150 80.8 6,528 0.1 576,716 9.6
1970 7,032,075 100.0 762,844 10.8 24,509 0.3 238,223 3.4 4,777,904 67.9 - 1,228,595 17.5
1980 7,477,503 100.0 926,360 12.4 17,382 0.2 434,850 5.8 3,953,603 52.9 79,205 1.1 2,066,103 27.6
1990 8,863,164 100.0 934,776 10.5 29,159 0.3 907,810 10.2 3,618,850 40.8 21,327 0.2 3,351,242 37.8
1998 9,343,055 100.0 886,377 9.5 22,717 0.2 1,099,417 11.8 3,173,648 34.0 25,776 0.3 4,135,120 44.3
2000 9,838,861 100.0 927,933 9.4 27,942 0.3 1,237,371 12.6 3,162,790 32.1 - 4,482,825 45.6
2010 10,604,452 100.0 876,253 8.3 28,723 0.3 1,456,195 13.7 2,836,543 26.7 - 5,406,738 51.0
2020 11,575,693 100.0 861,755 7.4 28,710 0.2 1,656,503 14.3 2,629,460 22.7 - 6,399,265 55.3
2030 12,737,077 100.0 820,392 6.4 27,657 0.2 1,856,440 14.6 2,451,846 19.2 - 7,580,742 59.5
2040 13,888,161 100.0 764,195 5.5 25,669 0.2 2,024,116 14.6 2,204,274 15.9 - 8,869,907 63.9
This table treats race and Hispanic origin as mutually exclusive. All persons of Hispanic origin are shown above as Latino, regardless of race. Race categories
include only non-Hispanics, e.g. non-Hispanic White.
Sources: U.S. Census of Population, 1920, 1930, 1940, 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990 (STF-1A).
1998 estimate, Claritas.
2000-2040 estimates prepared by California Department of Finance.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

TABLE 1.02 RACE/ETHNIC POPULATION ESTIMATE
Los Angeles County , 1999
Non-Latino
Latino
Total White African American American Indian Asian Pacific Other
Zip Code Population Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %
90001 52,831 39 0.1 7,899 15.0 0 0.0 68 0.1 208 0.4 44,617 84.5
90002 44,706 0 0.0 15,815 35.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 135 0.3 28,756 64.3
90003 57,946 0 0.0 16,300 28.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 197 0.3 41,449 71.5
90004 66,537 6,800 10.2 2,531 3.8 56 0.1 16,808 25.3 244 0.4 40,098 60.3
90005 41,022 4,309 10.5 3,126 7.6 22 0.1 9,277 22.6 173 0.4 24,115 58.8
90006 66,252 423 0.6 4,316 6.5 13 0.0 9,121 13.8 373 0.6 52,006 78.5
90007 44,242 4,160 9.4 8,095 18.3 37 0.1 2,481 5.6 310 0.7 29,159 65.9
90008 32,685 484 1.5 25,692 78.6 27 0.1 1,232 3.8 105 0.3 5,145 15.7
90011 90,889 28 0.0 10,262 11.3 1 0.0 40 0.0 347 0.4 80,211 88.3
90012 25,795 3,547 13.8 5,468 21.2 80 0.3 8,474 32.9 148 0.6 8,078 31.3
90013 1,755 203 11.6 429 24.4 17 1.0 436 24.8 7 0.4 663 37.8
90014 1,354 219 16.2 540 39.9 14 1.0 151 11.2 10 0.7 420 31.0
90015 16,192 691 4.3 1,228 7.6 15 0.1 594 3.7 101 0.6 13,563 83.8
90016 45,086 1,503 3.3 21,937 48.7 22 0.0 1,268 2.8 200 0.4 20,156 44.7
90017 18,944 345 1.8 446 2.4 16 0.1 2,861 15.1 84 0.4 15,192 80.2
90018 45,646 14 0.0 21,348 46.8 1 0.0 249 0.5 273 0.6 23,761 52.1
90019 65,701 3,614 5.5 27,323 41.6 55 0.1 3,006 4.6 311 0.5 31,392 47.8
90020 38,336 3,134 8.2 4,113 10.7 29 0.1 14,508 37.8 118 0.3 16,434 42.9
90021 923 42 4.6 169 18.3 2 0.2 36 3.9 25 2.7 649 70.3
90022 69,024 713 1.0 165 0.2 31 0.0 873 1.3 291 0.4 66,951 97.0
90023 49,888 206 0.4 212 0.4 12 0.0 419 0.8 156 0.3 48,883 98.0
90024 40,319 27,140 67.3 1,069 2.7 94 0.2 7,349 18.2 80 0.2 4,587 11.4
90025 40,219 25,022 62.2 1,208 3.0 102 0.3 6,302 15.7 68 0.2 7,517 18.7
90026 77,759 4,894 6.3 2,264 2.9 138 0.2 20,026 25.8 360 0.5 50,077 64.4
90027 52,118 20,194 38.7 1,990 3.8 124 0.2 8,427 16.2 173 0.3 21,210 40.7
90028 30,876 11,357 36.8 1,972 6.4 75 0.2 2,113 6.8 98 0.3 15,261 49.4
90029 41,166 5,219 12.7 1,390 3.4 51 0.1 7,879 19.1 163 0.4 26,464 64.3
90031 42,054 2,622 6.2 554 1.3 92 0.2 11,425 27.2 174 0.4 27,187 64.6
90032 48,233 1,540 3.2 1,043 2.2 73 0.2 7,522 15.6 157 0.3 37,898 78.6
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

TABLE 1.02 RACE/ETHNIC POPULATION ESTIMATE, Cont.
Los Angeles County , 1999
Non-Latino
Latino
Total White African American American Indian Asian Pacific Other
Zip Code Population Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %
90033 55,359 318 0.6 913 1.6 32 0.1 2,119 3.8 199 0.4 51,778 93.5
90034 55,258 23,340 42.2 7,676 13.9 158 0.3 9,183 16.6 191 0.3 14,710 26.6
90035 28,295 17,792 62.9 5,139 18.2 50 0.2 1,585 5.6 75 0.3 3,654 12.9
90036 31,643 21,520 68.0 3,074 9.7 65 0.2 3,327 10.5 37 0.1 3,620 11.4
90037 57,295 0 0.0 14,045 24.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 286 0.5 42,964 75.0
90038 31,199 4,290 13.8 1,334 4.3 40 0.1 3,413 10.9 119 0.4 22,003 70.5
90039 30,620 8,008 26.2 829 2.7 69 0.2 7,349 24.0 95 0.3 14,270 46.6
90040 9,878 254 2.6 101 1.0 23 0.2 197 2.0 46 0.5 9,257 93.7
90041 26,412 7,556 28.6 499 1.9 104 0.4 6,231 23.6 59 0.2 11,963 45.3
90042 65,754 6,348 9.7 1,630 2.5 190 0.3 11,227 17.1 218 0.3 46,141 70.2
90043 45,594 589 1.3 32,928 72.2 20 0.0 219 0.5 239 0.5 11,599 25.4
90044 85,719 8 0.0 38,211 44.6 2 0.0 58 0.1 370 0.4 47,070 54.9
90045 38,067 23,292 61.2 3,554 9.3 97 0.3 3,883 10.2 120 0.3 7,121 18.7
90046 50,637 39,379 77.8 2,085 4.1 177 0.3 2,602 5.1 75 0.1 6,319 12.5
90047 48,008 113 0.2 35,954 74.9 2 0.0 76 0.2 126 0.3 11,737 24.4
90048 22,706 19,108 84.2 539 2.4 35 0.2 1,185 5.2 26 0.1 1,813 8.0
90049 36,002 29,300 81.4 695 1.9 39 0.1 3,032 8.4 23 0.1 2,913 8.1
90056 8,553 2,254 26.4 5,283 61.8 11 0.1 414 4.8 65 0.8 526 6.1
90057 37,822 2,636 7.0 2,069 5.5 37 0.1 7,047 18.6 189 0.5 25,844 68.3
90058 3,740 9 0.2 743 19.9 0 0.0 5 0.1 22 0.6 2,961 79.2
90059 37,027 0 0.0 17,903 48.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 115 0.3 19,009 51.3
90061 24,154 1 0.0 10,888 45.1 0 0.0 6 0.0 66 0.3 13,193 54.6
90062 28,621 12 0.0 15,945 55.7 0 0.0 4 0.0 93 0.3 12,567 43.9
90063 61,479 1,841 3.0 1,873 3.0 38 0.1 917 1.5 212 0.3 56,598 92.1
90064 25,037 16,063 64.2 621 2.5 44 0.2 3,631 14.5 42 0.2 4,636 18.5
90065 50,241 6,173 12.3 782 1.6 102 0.2 8,687 17.3 136 0.3 34,361 68.4
90066 58,465 28,124 48.1 2,409 4.1 191 0.3 8,522 14.6 133 0.2 19,086 32.6
90067 3,532 3,046 86.2 75 2.1 2 0.1 214 6.1 7 0.2 188 5.3
90068 24,309 15,860 65.2 1,241 5.1 79 0.3 1,603 6.6 44 0.2 5,482 22.6
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

TABLE 1.02 RACE/ETHNIC POPULATION ESTIMATE, Cont.
Los Angeles County , 1999
Non-Latino
Latino
Total White African American American Indian Asian Pacific Other
Zip Code Population Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %
90069 22,220 18,536 83.4 804 3.6 53 0.2 849 3.8 41 0.2 1,937 8.7
90071 1,828 167 9.1 40 2.2 3 0.2 1,240 67.8 12 0.7 366 20.0
90073 581 450 77.5 10 1.7 2 0.3 71 12.2 0 0.0 48 8.3
90077 9,239 7,798 84.4 146 1.6 10 0.1 683 7.4 17 0.2 585 6.3
90201 104,261 4,267 4.1 1,039 1.0 221 0.2 1,390 1.3 384 0.4 96,960 93.0
90210 22,165 18,567 83.8 339 1.5 16 0.1 1,327 6.0 23 0.1 1,893 8.5
90211 8,051 6,682 83.0 209 2.6 11 0.1 707 8.8 14 0.2 428 5.3
90212 11,315 9,572 84.6 208 1.8 15 0.1 804 7.1 22 0.2 694 6.1
90220 47,944 1,331 2.8 21,784 45.4 11 0.0 358 0.7 117 0.2 24,343 50.8
90221 47,629 649 1.4 14,827 31.1 19 0.0 304 0.6 201 0.4 31,629 66.4
90222 29,861 0 0.0 10,526 35.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 112 0.4 19,223 64.4
90230 33,500 12,410 37.0 4,516 13.5 113 0.3 5,232 15.6 125 0.4 11,104 33.1
90232 15,623 7,662 49.0 1,055 6.8 67 0.4 2,586 16.6 40 0.3 4,213 27.0
90240 22,283 8,644 38.8 250 1.1 60 0.3 2,617 11.7 66 0.3 10,646 47.8
90241 38,679 14,813 38.3 1,159 3.0 151 0.4 3,545 9.2 148 0.4 18,863 48.8
90242 37,653 12,539 33.3 2,336 6.2 187 0.5 4,231 11.2 92 0.2 18,268 48.5
90245 15,984 12,821 80.2 187 1.2 60 0.4 1,017 6.4 26 0.2 1,873 11.7
90247 45,310 5,295 11.7 6,560 14.5 112 0.2 17,070 37.7 147 0.3 16,126 35.6
90248 10,306 1,648 16.0 1,726 16.7 21 0.2 3,642 35.3 39 0.4 3,230 31.3
90249 25,889 4,806 18.6 7,983 30.8 75 0.3 5,375 20.8 64 0.2 7,586 29.3
90250 82,311 18,457 22.4 21,430 26.0 223 0.3 10,880 13.2 368 0.4 30,953 37.6
90254 19,352 16,416 84.8 230 1.2 76 0.4 930 4.8 25 0.1 1,675 8.7
90255 75,924 689 0.9 926 1.2 31 0.0 718 0.9 283 0.4 73,277 96.5
90260 30,776 11,264 36.6 2,473 8.0 139 0.5 4,259 13.8 135 0.4 12,506 40.6
90262 64,570 109 0.2 9,774 15.1 2 0.0 76 0.1 221 0.3 54,388 84.2
90265 18,581 15,176 81.7 339 1.8 45 0.2 943 5.1 19 0.1 2,059 11.1
90266 34,372 29,656 86.3 223 0.6 74 0.2 2,046 6.0 33 0.1 2,340 6.8
90270 31,419 286 0.9 344 1.1 25 0.1 125 0.4 102 0.3 30,537 97.2
90272 22,826 20,012 87.7 147 0.6 28 0.1 1,340 5.9 13 0.1 1,286 5.6
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

TABLE 1.02 RACE/ETHNIC POPULATION ESTIMATE, Cont.
Los Angeles County , 1999
Non-Latino
Latino
Total White African American American Indian Asian Pacific Other
Zip Code Population Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %
90274 26,008 19,761 76.0 322 1.2 20 0.1 4,657 17.9 21 0.1 1,227 4.7
90275 43,400 27,752 63.9 867 2.0 87 0.2 10,861 25.0 48 0.1 3,785 8.7
90277 35,656 28,507 80.0 485 1.4 119 0.3 2,714 7.6 30 0.1 3,801 10.7
90278 38,094 27,813 73.0 692 1.8 174 0.5 3,770 9.9 49 0.1 5,596 14.7
90280 90,380 3,908 4.3 1,872 2.1 78 0.1 1,240 1.4 421 0.5 82,861 91.7
90290 6,992 6,074 86.9 79 1.1 26 0.4 324 4.6 7 0.1 482 6.9
90291 32,126 19,306 60.1 2,423 7.5 158 0.5 1,619 5.0 97 0.3 8,523 26.5
90292 18,679 15,243 81.6 644 3.4 51 0.3 1,464 7.8 9 0.0 1,268 6.8
90293 11,669 9,349 80.1 423 3.6 34 0.3 821 7.0 17 0.1 1,025 8.8
90301 39,586 546 1.4 12,571 31.8 5 0.0 399 1.0 175 0.4 25,890 65.4
90302 30,932 648 2.1 16,349 52.9 18 0.1 134 0.4 123 0.4 13,660 44.2
90303 28,236 76 0.3 10,579 37.5 12 0.0 52 0.2 105 0.4 17,412 61.7
90304 28,036 1,446 5.2 2,182 7.8 15 0.1 370 1.3 80 0.3 23,943 85.4
90305 14,739 760 5.2 12,646 85.8 37 0.3 165 1.1 58 0.4 1,073 7.3
90401 4,717 3,462 73.4 214 4.5 28 0.6 328 7.0 20 0.4 665 14.1
90402 11,569 9,821 84.9 73 0.6 11 0.1 986 8.5 24 0.2 654 5.7
90403 25,175 20,962 83.3 362 1.4 39 0.2 1,931 7.7 18 0.1 1,863 7.4
90404 21,486 10,046 46.8 2,313 10.8 68 0.3 1,870 8.7 79 0.4 7,110 33.1
90405 27,139 19,690 72.6 931 3.4 105 0.4 2,068 7.6 33 0.1 4,312 15.9
90501 39,514 15,146 38.3 1,434 3.6 145 0.4 8,257 20.9 110 0.3 14,422 36.5
90502 17,247 6,610 38.3 959 5.6 85 0.5 4,681 27.1 30 0.2 4,882 28.3
90503 40,768 24,365 59.8 546 1.3 140 0.3 11,597 28.4 66 0.2 4,054 9.9
90504 31,389 14,937 47.6 678 2.2 88 0.3 11,135 35.5 60 0.2 4,491 14.3
90505 35,150 23,390 66.5 431 1.2 76 0.2 8,016 22.8 33 0.1 3,204 9.1
90601 31,394 9,804 31.2 392 1.2 69 0.2 2,952 9.4 57 0.2 18,120 57.7
90602 24,704 6,785 27.5 306 1.2 74 0.3 873 3.5 74 0.3 16,592 67.2
90603 19,679 12,406 63.0 71 0.4 63 0.3 975 5.0 15 0.1 6,149 31.2
90604 38,359 15,919 41.5 546 1.4 114 0.3 1,922 5.0 100 0.3 19,758 51.5
90605 37,138 11,097 29.9 304 0.8 105 0.3 1,692 4.6 61 0.2 23,879 64.3
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

TABLE 1.02 RACE/ETHNIC POPULATION ESTIMATE, Cont.
Los Angeles County , 1999
Non-Latino
Latino
Total White African American American Indian Asian Pacific Other
Zip Code Population Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %
90606 32,157 3,994 12.4 554 1.7 55 0.2 854 2.7 117 0.4 26,583 82.7
90638 45,729 23,716 51.9 659 1.4 184 0.4 5,448 11.9 58 0.1 15,664 34.3
90640 70,158 6,270 8.9 574 0.8 73 0.1 12,864 18.3 220 0.3 50,157 71.5
90650 98,119 23,893 24.4 2,981 3.0 420 0.4 14,258 14.5 316 0.3 56,251 57.3
90660 62,345 4,105 6.6 424 0.7 117 0.2 2,195 3.5 195 0.3 55,309 88.7
90670 14,935 2,482 16.6 283 1.9 49 0.3 811 5.4 69 0.5 11,241 75.3
90701 15,902 5,110 32.1 447 2.8 42 0.3 3,061 19.2 52 0.3 7,190 45.2
90703 55,810 17,348 31.1 3,714 6.7 134 0.2 27,805 49.8 115 0.2 6,694 12.0
90706 63,535 29,188 45.9 4,161 6.5 357 0.6 7,731 12.2 146 0.2 21,952 34.6
90710 24,059 7,056 29.3 2,620 10.9 81 0.3 4,038 16.8 97 0.4 10,167 42.3
90712 29,014 18,998 65.5 1,544 5.3 130 0.4 2,703 9.3 60 0.2 5,579 19.2
90713 27,977 20,752 74.2 620 2.2 121 0.4 2,225 8.0 31 0.1 4,228 15.1
90715 19,512 8,500 43.6 1,524 7.8 128 0.7 4,359 22.3 30 0.2 4,971 25.5
90716 14,008 1,910 13.6 652 4.7 36 0.3 1,445 10.3 13 0.1 9,952 71.0
90717 24,388 13,984 57.3 786 3.2 127 0.5 3,181 13.0 45 0.2 6,265 25.7
90723 51,634 4,915 9.5 5,458 10.6 165 0.3 3,135 6.1 197 0.4 37,764 73.1
90731 59,034 23,817 40.3 4,096 6.9 275 0.5 3,376 5.7 136 0.2 27,334 46.3
90732 22,521 15,494 68.8 908 4.0 125 0.6 2,076 9.2 27 0.1 3,891 17.3
90744 50,634 3,163 6.2 1,919 3.8 69 0.1 2,512 5.0 159 0.3 42,812 84.6
90745 52,242 9,449 18.1 3,206 6.1 196 0.4 20,075 38.4 118 0.2 19,198 36.7
90746 27,048 1,799 6.7 16,998 62.8 49 0.2 2,979 11.0 74 0.3 5,149 19.0
90747 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
90802 35,640 13,278 37.3 4,675 13.1 197 0.6 2,794 7.8 173 0.5 14,523 40.7
90803 32,808 27,393 83.5 669 2.0 143 0.4 1,533 4.7 42 0.1 3,028 9.2
90804 38,656 13,742 35.5 5,302 13.7 204 0.5 7,332 19.0 152 0.4 11,924 30.8
90805 77,601 19,388 25.0 17,376 22.4 387 0.5 12,296 15.8 274 0.4 27,880 35.9
90806 45,039 7,801 17.3 10,686 23.7 111 0.2 7,553 16.8 141 0.3 18,747 41.6
90807 30,442 19,196 63.1 2,538 8.3 126 0.4 3,600 11.8 53 0.2 4,929 16.2
90808 38,955 30,009 77.0 756 1.9 157 0.4 2,784 7.1 61 0.2 5,188 13.3
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

TABLE 1.02 RACE/ETHNIC POPULATION ESTIMATE, Cont.
Los Angeles County , 1999
Non-Latino
Latino
Total White African American American Indian Asian Pacific Other
Zip Code Population Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %
90810 34,366 3,122 9.1 7,104 20.7 57 0.2 10,572 30.8 83 0.2 13,428 39.1
90813 61,637 2,665 4.3 9,348 15.2 102 0.2 10,992 17.8 311 0.5 38,219 62.0
90814 17,937 12,673 70.7 1,156 6.4 83 0.5 1,024 5.7 43 0.2 2,958 16.5
90815 38,452 29,888 77.7 996 2.6 166 0.4 3,292 8.6 29 0.1 4,081 10.6
90822 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
90840 1,089 716 65.7 54 5.0 4 0.4 221 20.3 2 0.2 92 8.4
91001 37,516 13,041 34.8 15,466 41.2 77 0.2 1,730 4.6 120 0.3 7,082 18.9
91006 29,741 15,992 53.8 235 0.8 76 0.3 7,725 26.0 41 0.1 5,672 19.1
91007 29,926 16,176 54.1 293 1.0 47 0.2 8,458 28.3 61 0.2 4,891 16.3
91010 28,216 9,278 32.9 2,797 9.9 75 0.3 3,194 11.3 64 0.2 12,808 45.4
91011 20,404 15,858 77.7 89 0.4 22 0.1 3,104 15.2 15 0.1 1,316 6.4
91016 42,487 16,364 38.5 5,161 12.1 114 0.3 2,201 5.2 81 0.2 18,566 43.7
91020 7,301 5,331 73.0 28 0.4 35 0.5 539 7.4 5 0.1 1,363 18.7
91023 91 71 78.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 15 16.5 0 0.0 5 5.5
91024 11,507 8,941 77.7 99 0.9 31 0.3 863 7.5 6 0.1 1,567 13.6
91030 25,331 13,190 52.1 800 3.2 68 0.3 6,431 25.4 47 0.2 4,795 18.9
91040 21,160 15,024 71.0 282 1.3 110 0.5 1,231 5.8 25 0.1 4,488 21.2
91042 26,233 17,498 66.7 369 1.4 109 0.4 1,626 6.2 43 0.2 6,588 25.1
91046 956 636 66.5 14 1.5 1 0.1 107 11.2 1 0.1 197 20.6
91101 16,612 7,341 44.2 2,555 15.4 42 0.3 1,714 10.3 58 0.3 4,902 29.5
91103 28,757 3,078 10.7 10,728 37.3 5 0.0 500 1.7 91 0.3 14,355 49.9
91104 39,543 13,078 33.1 7,131 18.0 109 0.3 2,613 6.6 132 0.3 16,480 41.7
91105 11,491 7,648 66.6 511 4.4 17 0.1 1,122 9.8 26 0.2 2,167 18.9
91106 26,222 11,909 45.4 3,339 12.7 82 0.3 3,816 14.6 99 0.4 6,977 26.6
91107 32,480 16,976 52.3 1,608 5.0 89 0.3 5,126 15.8 61 0.2 8,620 26.5
91108 13,663 7,392 54.1 28 0.2 6 0.0 5,388 39.4 16 0.1 833 6.1
91201 23,814 12,815 53.8 411 1.7 71 0.3 3,349 14.1 64 0.3 7,104 29.8
91202 21,062 13,782 65.4 187 0.9 50 0.2 4,018 19.1 36 0.2 2,989 14.2
91203 13,735 7,467 54.4 245 1.8 15 0.1 2,522 18.4 21 0.2 3,465 25.2
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

TABLE 1.02 RACE/ETHNIC POPULATION ESTIMATE, Cont.
Los Angeles County , 1999
Non-Latino
Latino
Total White African American American Indian Asian Pacific Other
Zip Code Population Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %
91204 16,741 4,918 29.4 411 2.5 31 0.2 3,352 20.0 68 0.4 7,961 47.6
91205 41,910 19,067 45.5 678 1.6 103 0.2 7,801 18.6 93 0.2 14,168 33.8
91206 32,844 17,939 54.6 495 1.5 77 0.2 6,830 20.8 73 0.2 7,430 22.6
91207 10,032 7,507 74.8 43 0.4 16 0.2 1,240 12.4 22 0.2 1,204 12.0
91208 15,927 11,647 73.1 145 0.9 17 0.1 2,476 15.5 25 0.2 1,617 10.2
91214 29,409 22,227 75.6 97 0.3 77 0.3 3,765 12.8 18 0.1 3,225 11.0
91301 24,178 20,181 83.5 298 1.2 52 0.2 1,987 8.2 17 0.1 1,643 6.8
91302 20,984 17,552 83.6 265 1.3 57 0.3 1,602 7.6 13 0.1 1,495 7.1
91303 20,465 6,951 34.0 805 3.9 39 0.2 1,730 8.5 65 0.3 10,875 53.1
91304 47,164 23,291 49.4 1,476 3.1 143 0.3 6,074 12.9 107 0.2 16,073 34.1
91306 39,488 18,175 46.0 1,162 2.9 110 0.3 6,111 15.5 70 0.2 13,860 35.1
91307 23,927 18,473 77.2 454 1.9 63 0.3 2,292 9.6 29 0.1 2,616 10.9
91311 35,395 24,903 70.4 773 2.2 105 0.3 4,812 13.6 50 0.1 4,752 13.4
91316 27,569 20,096 72.9 616 2.2 49 0.2 1,972 7.2 38 0.1 4,798 17.4
91321 30,664 15,899 51.8 2,205 7.2 139 0.5 1,424 4.6 59 0.2 10,938 35.7
91324 25,363 13,770 54.3 708 2.8 58 0.2 3,586 14.1 56 0.2 7,185 28.3
91325 29,953 17,564 58.6 995 3.3 96 0.3 3,365 11.2 42 0.1 7,891 26.3
91326 27,713 17,782 64.2 467 1.7 55 0.2 6,051 21.8 18 0.1 3,340 12.1
91331 97,730 5,353 5.5 6,397 6.5 155 0.2 5,771 5.9 293 0.3 79,761 81.6
91335 62,598 31,906 51.0 1,785 2.9 188 0.3 6,764 10.8 120 0.2 21,835 34.9
91340 33,439 2,062 6.2 785 2.3 52 0.2 541 1.6 132 0.4 29,867 89.3
91342 72,200 20,663 28.6 3,717 5.1 317 0.4 3,089 4.3 192 0.3 44,222 61.2
91343 51,751 18,079 34.9 3,090 6.0 138 0.3 6,064 11.7 164 0.3 24,216 46.8
91344 50,331 30,108 59.8 1,461 2.9 165 0.3 7,588 15.1 111 0.2 10,898 21.7
91345 15,930 5,809 36.5 563 3.5 76 0.5 1,715 10.8 50 0.3 7,717 48.4
91350 39,931 25,435 63.7 2,085 5.2 224 0.6 2,339 5.9 65 0.2 9,783 24.5
91351 49,374 36,575 74.1 984 2.0 263 0.5 2,009 4.1 62 0.1 9,481 19.2
91352 43,901 5,404 12.3 1,405 3.2 50 0.1 3,900 8.9 193 0.4 32,949 75.1
91354 14,128 11,312 80.1 216 1.5 72 0.5 943 6.7 23 0.2 1,562 11.1
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

TABLE 1.02 RACE/ETHNIC POPULATION ESTIMATE, Cont.
Los Angeles County , 1999
Non-Latino
Latino
Total White African American American Indian Asian Pacific Other
Zip Code Population Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %
91355 25,932 21,223 81.8 407 1.6 72 0.3 1,522 5.9 46 0.2 2,662 10.3
91356 28,580 21,956 76.8 585 2.0 42 0.1 1,630 5.7 33 0.1 4,334 15.2
91364 24,880 20,917 84.1 404 1.6 57 0.2 1,492 6.0 25 0.1 1,985 8.0
91367 37,833 29,208 77.2 892 2.4 82 0.2 2,744 7.3 46 0.1 4,861 12.8
91381 6,061 3,727 61.5 96 1.6 24 0.4 809 13.3 12 0.2 1,393 23.0
91384 21,776 6,838 31.4 1,525 7.0 53 0.2 916 4.2 15 0.1 12,429 57.1
91401 35,845 16,579 46.3 1,587 4.4 77 0.2 2,258 6.3 119 0.3 15,225 42.5
91402 56,425 6,981 12.4 5,121 9.1 105 0.2 7,865 13.9 218 0.4 36,135 64.0
91403 23,395 19,097 81.6 553 2.4 37 0.2 1,304 5.6 24 0.1 2,380 10.2
91405 45,804 10,703 23.4 3,152 6.9 103 0.2 4,497 9.8 122 0.3 27,227 59.4
91406 46,259 17,729 38.3 2,545 5.5 121 0.3 3,599 7.8 93 0.2 22,172 47.9
91411 21,705 9,245 42.6 935 4.3 41 0.2 1,232 5.7 95 0.4 10,157 46.8
91423 29,282 23,951 81.8 800 2.7 56 0.2 1,271 4.3 47 0.2 3,157 10.8
91436 14,938 11,332 75.9 289 1.9 14 0.1 1,007 6.7 19 0.1 2,277 15.2
91501 18,236 11,151 61.1 386 2.1 85 0.5 1,922 10.5 34 0.2 4,658 25.5
91502 11,400 4,355 38.2 327 2.9 46 0.4 989 8.7 38 0.3 5,645 49.5
91504 25,098 13,235 52.7 496 2.0 84 0.3 2,499 10.0 29 0.1 8,755 34.9
91505 31,151 20,623 66.2 507 1.6 121 0.4 1,890 6.1 50 0.2 7,960 25.6
91506 18,713 11,676 62.4 280 1.5 85 0.5 1,476 7.9 18 0.1 5,178 27.7
91601 36,221 11,365 31.4 2,371 6.5 100 0.3 2,235 6.2 99 0.3 20,051 55.4
91602 17,796 12,132 68.2 763 4.3 55 0.3 1,016 5.7 41 0.2 3,789 21.3
91604 25,841 21,802 84.4 805 3.1 73 0.3 1,166 4.5 37 0.1 1,958 7.6
91605 54,738 7,797 14.2 2,316 4.2 105 0.2 7,371 13.5 190 0.3 36,959 67.5
91606 41,868 12,177 29.1 1,856 4.4 75 0.2 3,161 7.5 120 0.3 24,479 58.5
91607 27,360 18,405 67.3 1,067 3.9 60 0.2 1,502 5.5 70 0.3 6,256 22.9
91608 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
91702 56,894 12,789 22.5 1,972 3.5 140 0.2 4,139 7.3 183 0.3 37,671 66.2
91706 77,578 3,761 4.8 1,943 2.5 111 0.1 9,567 12.3 211 0.3 61,985 79.9
91711 35,080 23,941 68.2 2,150 6.1 99 0.3 3,420 9.7 51 0.1 5,419 15.4
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

TABLE 1.02 RACE/ETHNIC POPULATION ESTIMATE, Cont.
Los Angeles County , 1999
Non-Latino
Latino
Total White African American American Indian Asian Pacific Other
Zip Code Population Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %
91722 32,725 12,808 39.1 1,510 4.6 100 0.3 2,812 8.6 98 0.3 15,397 47.0
91723 17,019 7,849 46.1 703 4.1 75 0.4 1,347 7.9 32 0.2 7,013 41.2
91724 25,482 13,701 53.8 757 3.0 63 0.2 2,524 9.9 70 0.3 8,367 32.8
91731 28,995 1,801 6.2 231 0.8 41 0.1 3,647 12.6 71 0.2 23,204 80.0
91732 61,838 3,807 6.2 731 1.2 37 0.1 7,353 11.9 128 0.2 49,782 80.5
91733 45,363 985 2.2 241 0.5 27 0.1 4,236 9.3 97 0.2 39,777 87.7
91740 25,986 16,053 61.8 433 1.7 108 0.4 2,118 8.2 28 0.1 7,246 27.9
91741 25,638 19,527 76.2 161 0.6 81 0.3 1,472 5.7 22 0.1 4,375 17.1
91744 78,495 4,427 5.6 2,851 3.6 93 0.1 6,530 8.3 259 0.3 64,335 82.0
91745 57,166 16,067 28.1 1,155 2.0 192 0.3 17,795 31.1 75 0.1 21,882 38.3
91746 30,581 1,094 3.6 803 2.6 52 0.2 2,525 8.3 65 0.2 26,042 85.2
91748 45,963 10,736 23.4 2,324 5.1 85 0.2 15,300 33.3 86 0.2 17,432 37.9
91750 35,523 22,576 63.6 1,130 3.2 132 0.4 3,053 8.6 78 0.2 8,554 24.1
91754 34,387 4,026 11.7 198 0.6 47 0.1 20,481 59.6 60 0.2 9,575 27.8
91755 27,932 3,674 13.2 194 0.7 58 0.2 16,998 60.9 65 0.2 6,943 24.9
91765 47,724 21,120 44.3 2,662 5.6 107 0.2 13,718 28.7 123 0.3 9,994 20.9
91766 65,380 8,415 12.9 5,817 8.9 90 0.1 5,938 9.1 187 0.3 44,933 68.7
91767 44,270 7,324 16.5 9,180 20.7 116 0.3 1,922 4.3 90 0.2 25,638 57.9
91768 33,188 5,629 17.0 4,080 12.3 47 0.1 1,868 5.6 83 0.3 21,481 64.7
91770 62,469 7,279 11.7 361 0.6 116 0.2 23,813 38.1 139 0.2 30,761 49.2
91773 34,770 21,602 62.1 1,256 3.6 122 0.4 3,640 10.5 49 0.1 8,101 23.3
91775 23,291 10,614 45.6 326 1.4 35 0.2 6,500 27.9 32 0.1 5,784 24.8
91776 37,383 7,258 19.4 459 1.2 107 0.3 14,577 39.0 80 0.2 14,902 39.9
91780 32,791 15,865 48.4 203 0.6 66 0.2 7,582 23.1 51 0.2 9,024 27.5
91789 45,267 12,795 28.3 2,567 5.7 79 0.2 17,415 38.5 63 0.1 12,348 27.3
91790 41,979 11,691 27.8 2,935 7.0 93 0.2 5,689 13.6 89 0.2 21,482 51.2
91791 30,474 10,466 34.3 1,886 6.2 76 0.2 5,246 17.2 81 0.3 12,719 41.7
91792 31,998 3,916 12.2 3,888 12.2 85 0.3 9,560 29.9 104 0.3 14,445 45.1
91801 55,977 10,768 19.2 1,131 2.0 100 0.2 24,196 43.2 123 0.2 19,659 35.1
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

TABLE 1.02 RACE/ETHNIC POPULATION ESTIMATE, Cont.
Los Angeles County , 1999
Non-Latino
Latino
Total White African American American Indian Asian Pacific Other
Zip Code Population Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %
91803 31,493 5,031 16.0 401 1.3 60 0.2 13,321 42.3 90 0.3 12,590 40.0
93510 8,608 6,189 71.9 306 3.6 78 0.9 172 2.0 12 0.1 1,851 21.5
93532 3,430 2,713 79.1 123 3.6 36 1.0 68 2.0 24 0.7 466 13.6
93534 35,976 23,070 64.1 2,383 6.6 289 0.8 1,474 4.1 58 0.2 8,702 24.2
93535 52,692 33,763 64.1 3,954 7.5 345 0.7 2,180 4.1 71 0.1 12,379 23.5
93536 49,212 31,700 64.4 3,736 7.6 368 0.7 2,251 4.6 71 0.1 11,086 22.5
93543 12,742 5,192 40.7 1,160 9.1 100 0.8 240 1.9 44 0.3 6,006 47.1
93544 1,915 1,252 65.4 245 12.8 18 0.9 40 2.1 3 0.2 357 18.6
93550 63,680 32,212 50.6 4,347 6.8 405 0.6 2,799 4.4 81 0.1 23,836 37.4
93551 31,454 21,364 67.9 1,242 3.9 192 0.6 1,832 5.8 39 0.1 6,785 21.6
93552 22,365 10,793 48.3 1,491 6.7 122 0.5 1,373 6.1 41 0.2 8,545 38.2
93553 3,729 2,201 59.0 354 9.5 33 0.9 65 1.7 15 0.4 1,061 28.5
93563 361 243 67.3 35 9.7 2 0.6 16 4.4 2 0.6 63 17.5
93591 7,238 4,041 55.8 667 9.2 53 0.7 217 3.0 24 0.3 2,236 30.9
Total 9,344,645 3,075,727 32.9 889,718 9.5 22,262 0.2 1,108,030 11.9 25,634 0.3 4,223,274 45.2
Source: Data courtesy of La Opinion, estimate by Claritas, 1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.03 RACE/ETHNIC GROUPS
Los Angeles County Service Planning Areas, 1998 Estimate
Persons
Service Total African American Asian
Planning Areas* Population American Indian Pacific White Other Latino
1 - Antelope Valley 295,896 19,908 2,108 12,889 184,037 504 76,450
2 - San Fernando Valley 1,893,411 63,780 5,202 177,422 996,112 4,176 646,719
3 - San Gabriel Valley 1,708,931 104,894 3,831 329,729 516,214 3,947 750,316
4 - Metro 1,163,222 72,836 1,983 184,763 215,082 4,055 684,503
5 - West 596,716 41,150 1,492 63,553 386,088 1,377 103,056
6 - South 985,144 365,859 291 9,181 13,459 3,871 592,483
7 - East 1,291,890 29,443 3,383 108,039 312,491 3,929 834,605
8 - South Bay 1,407,845 188,507 4,427 213,841 550,165 3,917 446,988
L.A. County Total 9,343,055 886,377 22,717 1,099,417 3,173,648 25,776 4,135,120
*Based on zip codes.
Source: Claritas.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

LATINO POPULATION - 1998
Los Angeles County by Zip Code
Northern L.A. County
Valencia
Chatsworth
Pomona
Santa Monica
Percent Latino
< 15%
15 - 24%
Whittier
25 - 39%
40 - 59%
60%+
Redondo Beach
0
Miles
5
10
December 1999
San Pedro
Long Beach
Note: Data values are by zip code.
Source: Claritas

Table 1.04 LATINO ETHNIC GROUPS
Los Angeles County, 1990, 1998-1999 Average
Persons
1990 1998-1999
National Origin Number % Number %
Mexican 2,519,514 76.2 3,327,159 75.6
Central or South American 548,435 12.4 908,979 20.7
Other Hispanic 238,167 11.4 164,523 3.7
Total 3,306,116 100.0 4,400,661 100.0
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current
Population Survey, March Supplement: 1992, 1993, 1998 and 1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.05 LATINO POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County - 1990
Population Growth % Immigration %
Age
1960 276,716 - American Born 1,544,603 46.7
1970 1,228,595 113.0 Foreign Born 1,761,513 53.3
1980 2,066,103 69.0 Immigrated since 1985 367,453 20.9
1990 3,351,242 63.0
Communities with 40,000+ Persons
0-4 371,727 11.2 Los Angeles 1,370,476
5-9 322,662 9.8 East Los Angeles Unincorporated 119,418
10-14 290,472 8.8 Long Beach 99,878
15-19 313,686 9.5 El Monte 76,740
20-24 385,400 11.7 South Gate 71,740
25-34 705,143 21.3 Pomona 66,589
35-64 795,390 24.1 Huntington Park 51,006
65-74 78,057 2.4 Pico Rivera 48,891
75+ 43,579 1.3 Baldwin Park 48,794
Total 3,306,116 100.0 Norwalk 44,697
Florence Graham 43,343
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 470,527 16.0 Less Than 5th Grade 284,479 17.5
Speak English Very Well 993,105 33.8 5-12th Grade, No Diploma 701,700 43.3
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 277,471 17.1
Very Well 1,470,757 50.1 Some College 260,416 16.1
Total Age 5 and Over 2,934,389 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 98,103 6.0
Employment
Young Adults Enrolled in College 19.6
Occupation
In Labor Force 1,574,554 100.0 Managerial/Professional 153,911 10.9
Unemployed 158,561 10.1 Technical/Clerical/Sales 335,311 23.7
. Service 256,125 18.1
Employed Farming/Fishing/Forestry 34,753 2.5
Male 866,694 55.0 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 211,929 15.0
Female 546,755 34.7 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 421,420 29.8
Total 1,413,449 100.0
Self Employed 70,227 4.5
Household Income
Housing
Less Than $15,000 187,506 24.3 Own 266,981 34.8
$15,000 - $24,999 160,493 20.8 Rent 500,477 65.2
$25,000 - $34,999 136,090 17.6 Total 767,458 100.0
$35,000 - $49,999 136,602 17.7
$50,000 - $74,999 103,214 13.4 Vehicle Available 654,648 85.3
$75,000 And Over 48,378 6.3
Total Households 772,283 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $27,361 Below Poverty Level 744,383 22.9
Median Family Income $26,791 Above Poverty Level 2,506,740 77.1
Per Capita Income $8,089
Family Type
Families with children 439,411
Married couples 319,861 72.8
Female headed 81,642 18.6
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.06 ARGENTINEAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 3,152 19.2
1970 Foreign Born 13,304 80.8
1980 Immigrated since 1985 2,309 14.0
1990 16,456
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 7,276
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 1,453 9.2 Less than 5th Grade 3.0
Speak English Very Well 7,463 47.0 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 23.9
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 23.2
Very Well 6,952 43.8 Some College 30.0
Total Age 5 and over 15,868 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 19.9
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 44.8
Occupation
In Labor Force 10,289 100.0 Managerial/Professional 2,846 29.0
Unemployed 467 4.5 Technical /Clerical Sales 2,903 29.6
Service 1,231 12.5
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 40 0.4
Male 6,046 58.8 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 1,612 16.4
Female 3,776 36.7 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 1,190 12.1
Total 9,822 100
Self Employed 1,252 12.2
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 1,260 18.7 Own 2,908 42.9
$15,000-$24,999 1,167 17.3 Rent 3,876 57.1
$25,000-$34,999 1,018 15.1 Total 6,784 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 1,285 19.0
$50,000-$74,999 1,199 17.8 Vehicle Available 6,376 94.0
$75,000 and Over 819 12.1
Total Households 6,748 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $33,980
Median Family Income $37,722 Below Poverty Level 1,703 10.4
Per Capita Income $17,303 Above Poverty Level 14,676 89.6
Family Type
Families with children 2,440
Married couples 2,084 85.4
Female headed 232 9.5
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.07 CENTRAL AMERICAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 78,966 17.4
1970 Foreign Born 374,082 82.6
1980 Immigrated since 1985 92,335 2.0
1990 453,048
Age Communities with 5,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 310,199
5-9 Long Beach 6,858
10-14 Glendale 7,103
15-19 Pasadena 4,261
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 16,665 4.0 Less than 5th Grade 20.8
Speak English Very Well 11,577 2.8 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 47.4
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 14.5
Very Well 286,549 69.1 Some College 12.7
Total Age 5 and over 414,791 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 4.6
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 19.1
Occupation
In Labor Force 252,588 100.0 Managerial/Professional 15,452 6.9
Unemployed 29,346 11.6 Technical /Clerical Sales 41,785 18.7
Service 64,022 28.7
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 3,489 1.6
Male 127,367 50.4 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 33,084 14.8
Female 95,875 38.0 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 65,410 29.3
Total 223,242 100.0
Self Employed 12,243 4.8
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 32,143 29.5 Own 16,439 15.3
$15,000-$24,999 28,796 26.4 Rent 91,208 84.7
$25,000-$34,999 20,089 18.4 Total 107,647 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 16,182 14.8 .
$50,000-$74,999 8,649 7.9 Vehicle Available 3,099 2.9
$75,000 and Over 3,198 2.9
Total Households 109,057 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $22,336
Median Family Income $20,659 Below Poverty Level 125,538 28.1
Per Capita Income $6,750 Above Poverty Level 321,172 71.9
Family Type
Families with children 68,348
Married couples 44,433 65.0
Female headed 14,882 21.8
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.08 CHILEAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 1,976 24.1
1970 Foreign Born 6,225 75.9
1980 Immigrated since 1985 1,029 12.5
1990 8,201
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 3,835
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 757 9.9 Less than 5th Grade 3.0
Speak English Very Well 3,576 46.9 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 18.3
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 24.4
Very Well 3,294 43.2 Some College 31.4
Total Age 5 and over 7,627 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 22.9
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 50.3
Occupation
In Labor Force 5,037 100.0 Managerial/Professional 1,284 27.1
Unemployed 303 6.0 Technical /Clerical Sales 1,668 35.2
Service 657 13.9
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 39 0.8
Male 2,628 52.2 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 537 11.3
Female 2,106 41.8 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 549 11.6
Total 4,734 100
Self Employed 664 13.2
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 483 16.6 Own 1,246 43.3
$15,000-$24,999 477 16.4 Rent 1,631 56.7
$25,000-$34,999 506 17.4 Total 2,877 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 563 19.3
$50,000-$74,999 545 18.7 Vehicle Available 2,702 93.9
$75,000 and Over 340 11.7
Total Households 2,914 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $34,777
Median Family Income $38,802 Below Poverty Level 672 8.3
Per Capita Income $15,297 Above Poverty Level 7,443 91.7
Family Type
Families with children 1,421
Married couples 1,199 84.4
Female headed 159 11.2
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.09 COLOMBIAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 5,450 25.1
1970 Foreign Born 16,228 74.9
1980 Immigrated since 1985 2,720 12.5
1990 21,678
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 7,779
5-9 Glendale 1,182
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 1,609 8.1 Less than 5th Grade 5.6
Speak English Very Well 7,929 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 26.2
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 24.4
Very Well 10,411 52.2 Some College 25.5
Total Age 5 and over 19,948 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 18.6
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 42.9
Occupation
In Labor Force 12,728 100.0 Managerial/Professional 2,675 22.7
Unemployed 929 7.3 Technical /Clerical Sales 3,889 33.0
Service 1,878 15.9
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 43 0.4
Male 6,070 47.7 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 1,563 13.2
Female 5,729 45.0 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 1,751 14.8
Total 11,799 100.0
Self Employed 1,171 9.2
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 1,485 21.9 Own 2,629 39.7
$15,000-$24,999 1,150 17.0 Rent 1,631 24.7
$25,000-$34,999 1,088 16.0 Total 6,615 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 1,222 18.0
$50,000-$74,999 1,186 17.5 Vehicle Available 5,881 88.9
$75,000 and Over 651 9.6
Total Households 6,782 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $31,198
Median Family Income $33,457 Below Poverty Level 3,465 16.2
Per Capita Income $13,094 Above Poverty Level 17,876 83.8
Family Type
Families with children 3,134
Married couples 2192 69.9
Female headed 687 21.9
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.10 COSTA RICAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 2,840 27.3
1970 Foreign Born 7,548 72.7
1980 Immigrated since 1985 807 7.8
1990 10,388
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 3,924
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 819 8.4 Less than 5th Grade 5.3
Speak English Very Well 5,163 52.7 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 29.8
Do Not Speak English 0.0 High School Graduate 19.1
Very Well 3,815 38.9 Some College 33.7
Total Age 5 and over 9,797 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 12.1
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 45.0
Occupation
In Labor Force 6,079 100.0 Managerial/Professional 1,247 21.7
Unemployed 340 5.6 Technical /Clerical Sales 2,119 36.9
Service 857 14.9
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 34 0.6
Male 3,133 51.5 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 642 11.2
Female 2,606 42.9 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 840 14.6
Total 5,739 100.0
Self Employed 442 7.3
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 682 20.0 Own 1,363 40.6
$15,000-$24,999 530 15.5 Rent 1,997 59.4
$25,000-$34,999 525 15.4 Total 3,360 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 733 21.4
$50,000-$74,999 581 17.0 Vehicle Available 3,099 92.2
$75,000 and Over 367 10.7
Total Households 3,418 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $34,474
Median Family Income $35,010 Below Poverty Level 1,191 11.5
Per Capita Income $13,643 Above Poverty Level 9,157 88.5
Family Type
Families with children 1,700
Married couples 1,217 71.6
Female headed 378 22.2
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.11 CUBAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County - 1990
Population Growth % Immigration %
Age
1960 American Born 13,192 27.8
1970 Foreign Born 34,342 72.2
1980 46,363 - Immigrated since 1985 1,415 4.1
1990 47,534 3.0
Communities with 800+ Persons
0-4 2,559 5.6 Los Angeles 15,602
5-9 2,128 4.6 Glendale 2,799
10-14 1,901 4.1 Hawthorne 1,755
15-19 2,447 5.3 Bell 1,698
20-24 3,165 6.9 Huntington Park 1,607
25-34 8,230 17.9 Downey 1,570
35-64 17,991 39.2 Burbank 1,415
65-74 4,173 9.1 Long Beach 967
75+ 3,293 7.2 Alhambra 848
Total 45,887 100.0 Inglewood 803
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 4,570 10.2 Less Than 5th Grade 2,993 8.6
Speak English Very Well 18,738 41.7 5-12th Grade, No Diploma 11,902 34.2
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 6,508 18.7
Very Well 21,613 48.1 Some College 8,317 23.9
Total Age 5 and Over 44,921 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 5,081 14.6
Employment Young Adults Enrolled in College 4508 41.6
In Labor Force 24,814 100.0 Occupation
Unemployed 1,937 7.8 Managerial/Professional 5,632 24.6
. Technical/Clerical/Sales 7,886 34.5
Employed 22,877 92.2 Service 2,998 13.1
Male 12,551 54.9 Farming/Fishing/Forestry 119 0.5
Female 10,326 45.1 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 2,615 11.4
Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 3,627 15.9
Self Employed 2,285 10.0 Total 22,877 100.0
Household Income
Less Than $15,000 5,465 29.9 Housing
$15,000 - $24,999 2,790 15.3 Own 7,400 40.2
$25,000 - $34,999 2,299 12.6 Rent 10,987 59.8
$35,000 - $49,999 3,061 16.8 Total 18,387 100.0
$50,000 - $74,999 2,794 15.3
$75,000 And Over 1,864 10.2 Vehicle Available 15,258 83.1
Total Households 18,273 100.0
Median Household Income $28,537 Poverty Status
Median Family Income $35,358 Below Poverty Level 5,068 10.8
Per Capita Income $14,860 Above Poverty Level 41,854 89.2
Family Type
Families with children 5,381
Married couples 3,976 73.9
Female headed 1,042 19.4
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.12 DOMINICIAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 807 36.6
1970 Foreign Born 1,395 63.4
1980 Immigrated since 1985 211 9.6
1990 2,202
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 408 19.5 Less than 5th Grade 4.6
Speak English Very Well 964 46.0 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 28.3
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 17.0
Very Well 723 34.5 Some College 29.4
Total Age 5 and over 2,095 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 20.7
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 26.1
Occupation
In Labor Force 1,281 100.0 Managerial/Professional 289 26.5
Unemployed 122 9.5 Technical /Clerical Sales 457 41.8
Service 142 13.0
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 0 0.0
Male 529 41.3 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 96 8.8
Female 630 49.2 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 108 9.9
Total 1,092 100.0
Self Employed 1,159 90.5
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 230 27.4 Own 207 24.3
$15,000-$24,999 109 13.0 Rent 645 75.7
$25,000-$34,999 62 7.4 Total 852 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 190 22.6
$50,000-$74,999 141 16.8 Vehicle Available 719
$75,000 and Over 107 12.8
Total Households 839 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $36,775
Median Family Income $40,753 Below Poverty Level 305 14.3
Per Capita Income $14,299 Above Poverty Level 1,832 85.7
Family Type
Families with Children 354
Married couples 267 75.4
Female headed 87 24.6
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.13 ECUADORIAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 5,169 27.3
1970 Foreign Born 13,789 72.7
1980 Immigrated since 1985 1,720 9.1
1990 18,958
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 8,624
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 1,356 7.6 Less than 5th Grade 4.7
Speak English Very Well 7,903 44.3 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 28.4
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 23.1
Very Well 8,585 48.1 Some College 29.6
Total Age 5 and over 17,844 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 14.2
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 46.5
Occupation
In Labor Force 11,270 100.0 Managerial/Professional 2,029 19.5
Unemployed 1,001 8.9 Technical /Clerical Sales 3,889 37.5
Service 1,225 11.8
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 41 0.4
Male 5,644 50.1 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 1,099 10.6
Female 4,625 41.0 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 2,097 20.2
Total 10,380 100.0
Self Employed 734 6.5
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 1,173 19.3 Own 2,655 44.8
$15,000-$24,999 932 15.3 Rent 3,265 55.2
$25,000-$34,999 1,101 18.1 Total 5,920 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 1,230 20.2
$50,000-$74,999 997 16.4 Vehicle Available 5,295 89.4
$75,000 and Over 647 10.6
Total Households 6,080 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $32,424
Median Family Income $34,589 Below Poverty Level 2,082 11.0
Per Capita Income $12,476 Above Poverty Level 16,764 89.0
Family Type
Families with children 2,850
Married couples 2,162 75.9
Female headed 553 19.4
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.14 GUATEMALAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County - 1990
Population Growth % Immigration %
Age
1960 American Born 20,992 16.8
1970 Not available Foreign Born 104,099 83.2
1980 Immigrated since 1985 29,354 28.2
1990
Communities with 1,000+ Persons
0-4 Los Angeles 86,078
5-9 Inglewood 2,313
10-14 Long Beach 1,842
15-19 Lennox 1,765
20-24 Not available Glendale 1,696
25-34 Hungtington Park 1,439
35-64 Lynwood 1,401
65-74 El Monte 1,339
75+ Hawthorne 1,178
Total Cudahy 1,159
Language
Education
English Only 3,981 3.5 Less Than 5th Grade 14,803 21.4
Speak English Very Well 27,940 24.3 5-12th Grade, No Diploma 34,521 49.9
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 9,339 13.5
Very Well 83,245 72.3 Some College 7,886 11.4
Total Age 5 and Over 115,166 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 2,629 3.8
Young Adults Enrolled in College 17.2
Employment
Occupation
In Labor Force 71,559 100.0 Managerial/Professional 3,647 5.8
Unemployed 8,292 11.6 Technical/Clerical/Sales 9,860 15.6
. Service 19,515 30.8
Employed 63,267 88.4 Farming/Fishing/Forestry 806 1.3
Male 37,915 59.9 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 10,152 16.0
Female 25,352 40.1 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 19,287 30.5
Total 63,267 100.0
Self Employed 3,437 5.4
Household Income
Housing
Less Than $15,000 9,080 30.5 Own 4,212 14.3
$15,000 - $24,999 7,740 26.0 Rent 25,325 85.7
$25,000 - $34,999 5,485 18.4 Total 29,537 100.0
$35,000 - $49,999 4,515 15.2
$50,000 - $74,999 2,218 7.5 Vehicle Available 22,907 77.6
$75,000 And Over 691 2.3
Total Households 29,729 100.0
Poverty Status
Median Household Income $22,019 Below Poverty Level 37,077 30.0
Median Family Income $19,963 Above Poverty Level 86,513 70.0
Per Capita Income $6,561
Family Type
Families with children 18,704
Married couples 12,597 67.3
Female headed 3,709 19.8
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.15 HONDURAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 4,038 17.6
1970 Foreign Born 18,930 82.4
1980 Immigrated since 1985 5,795 25.2
1990 22,968
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 14,407
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 1,300 6.2 Less than 5th Grade 19.3
Speak English Very Well 5,735 27.3 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 44.6
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 15.2
Very Well 13,988 66.5 Some College 15.0
Total Age 5 and over 21,023 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 5.9
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 20.1
Occupation
In Labor Force 12,839 100.0 Managerial/Professional 839 7.5
Unemployed 1,712 13.3 Technical /Clerical Sales 2,193 19.7
Service 3,148 28.3
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 190 1.7
Male 5,931 46.2 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 1,874 16.8
Female 5,196 40.5 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 2,883 25.9
Total 11,127 100
Self Employed 769 6.0
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 1,882 34.9 Own 798 14.9
$15,000-$24,999 1,251 23.2 Rent 4,572 85.1
$25,000-$34,999 923 17.1 Total 5,370 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 766 14.2
$50,000-$74,999 432 8.0 Vehicle Available 4,071 75.8
$75,000 and Over 144 2.7
Total Households 5,398 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $21,330
Median Family Income $18,736 Below Poverty Level 7,667 33.9
Per Capita Income $6,617 Above Poverty Level 14,960 66.1
Family Type
Families with children 3,042
Married couples 1,731 56.9
Female headed 1,006 33.1
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.16 MEXICAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County - 1990
Population Growth % Immigration %
Age
1960 Not available American Born 1,298,820 51.6
1970 Foreign Born 1,220,694 48.4
1980 1,643,150 - Immigrated since 1985 250,101 20.5
1990 2,519,514 53.3
Communities with 35,000+ Persons
0-4 304,694 12.1 Los Angeles 925,141
5-9 262,889 10.4 East Los Angeles Unincorporated 112,223
10-14 231,161 9.1 Long Beach 81,824
15-19 251,233 9.9 Montebello 36,010
20-24 304,079 12.0 El Monte 68,846
25-34 508,484 20.1 Pomona 60,238
35-64 571,361 22.6 South Gate 56,252
65-74 59,617 2.4 Pico Rivera 45,369
75+ 33,642 1.3 Baldwin Park 43,687
Total 2,527,160 100.0 Huntington Park 40,631
Norwalk 38,833
Florence Graham Unincorporated 38,421
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 383,325 17.3 Less Than 5th Grade 219,216 18.7
Speak English Very Well 1,725,307 77.9 5-12th Grade, No Diploma 525,181 44.8
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 196,942 16.8
Very Well 107,485 4.9 Some College 175,842 15.0
Total Age 5 and Over 2,216,117 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 55,097 4.7
Young Adults Enrolled in College 18.3
Employment
Occupation
In Labor Force 1,149,367 100.0 Managerial/Professional 103,453 10.0
Unemployed 115,333 10.0 Technical/Clerical/Sales 241,553 23.4
Service 169,175 16.4
Employed 1,034,034 90.0 Farming/Fishing/Forestry 29,846 2.9
Male 652,109 63.1 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 160,364 15.5
Female 381,925 36.9 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 329,643 31.9
Total 1,034,034 100.0
Self Employed 45,927 4.4
Household Income
Housing
Less Than $15,000 131,464 23.4 Own 210,254 37.6
$15,000 - $24,999 114,854 20.4 Rent 349,238 62.4
$25,000 - $34,999 100,933 17.9 Total 559,492 100.0
$35,000 - $49,999 102,728 18.3
$50,000 - $74,999 77,912 13.9 Vehicle Available 482,297 86.2
$75,000 And Over 34,554 6.1
Total Households 562,445 100.0
Poverty Status
Median Household Income $28,034 Below Poverty Level 567,746 22.9
Median Family Income $27,310 Above Poverty Level 1,914,427 77.1
Per Capita Income $7,723
Family Type
Families with children 333,355
Married couples 248,337 74.5
Female headed 58,811 17.6
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles,2000

Population Growth
Table 1.17 NICARGUAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 6,467 19.1
1970 Foreign Born 27,379 80.9
1980 Immigrated since 1985 8,695 25.7
1990 33,846
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 17,032
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 1,825 5.8 Less than 5th Grade 13.2
Speak English Very Well 10,398 33.2 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 34.6
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 19.2
Very Well 19,143 61.0 Some College 22.5
Total Age 5 and over 31,366 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 10.5
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 26.4
Occupation
In Labor Force 17,606 100.0 Managerial/Professional 2,097 13.3
Unemployed 1,893 10.8 Technical /Clerical Sales 4,804 30.6
Service 2,783 17.7
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 213 1.4
Male 8,475 48.1 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 1,701 10.8
Female 7,238 41.1 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 4,115 26.2
Total 15,713 100
Self Employed 769 4.4
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 1,989 25.1 Own 1,776 22.8
$15,000-$24,999 1,673 21.1 Rent 6,009 77.2
$25,000-$34,999 1,508 19.0 Total 7,785 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 1,344 17.0
$50,000-$74,999 959 12.1 Vehicle Available 6,506 83.6
$75,000 and Over 456 5.8
Total Households 7,929 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $26,346
Median Family Income $25,398 Below Poverty Level 7,584 22.7
Per Capita Income $7,619 Above Poverty Level 25,839 77.3
Family Type
Families with children 4,731
Married couples 3,429 72.5
Female headed 809 17.1
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.18 PANAMANIAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 1,316 24.9
1970 Foreign Born 3,965 75.1
1980 Immigrated since 1985 689 13.0
1990 5,281
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 2,654
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 1,049 21.0 Less than 5th Grade 1.7
Speak English Very Well 2,697 54.1 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 19.4
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 19.1
Very Well 1,241 24.9 Some College 39.2
Total Age 5 and over 4,987 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 20.6
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 46.7
Occupation
In Labor Force 3,243 100.0 Managerial/Professional 912 31.2
Unemployed 324 10.0 Technical /Clerical Sales 1,081 37.0
Service 356 12.2
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 8 0.3
Male 1,378 42.5 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 238 8.2
Female 1,541 47.5 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 324 11.1
Total 2,919 100.0
Self Employed 94 2.9
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 371 18.0 Own 627 32.4
$15,000-$24,999 501 24.3 Rent 1,308 67.6
$25,000-$34,999 365 17.7 Total 1,935 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 283 13.7
$50,000-$74,999 326 15.8 Vehicle Available 1,599 82.6
$75,000 and Over 214 10.4
Total Households 2,060 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $30,319
Median Family Income $34,041 Below Poverty Level 552 10.6
Per Capita Income $15,075 Above Poverty Level 4,650 89.4
Female Type
Families with children 668
Married couples 412 61.7
Female headed 243 36.4
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.19 PERUVIAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 4,492 20.5
1970 Foreign Born 17,410 79.5
1980 Immigrated since 1985 4,242 19.4
1990 21,902
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 9,872
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 1,583 7.8 Less than 5th Grade 4.2
Speak English Very Well 8,173 40.4 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 20.1
Do Not Speak English 10,462 51.7 High School Graduate 26.6
Very Well 0.0 Some College 31.3
Total Age 5 and over 20,218 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 17.8
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 41.8
Occupation
In Labor Force 13,259 100.0 Managerial/Professional 2,494 20.3
Unemployed 987 7.4 Technical /Clerical Sales 3,966 32.3
Service 2,124 17.3
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 106 0.9
Male 7,163 54.0 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 1,196 9.7
Female 5,109 38.5 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 2,386 19.4
Total 12,272 100.0
Self Employed 1,012 7.6
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 1,376 20.6 Own 2,029 30.8
$15,000-$24,999 1,170 17.5 Rent 4,550 69.2
$25,000-$34,999 1,099 16.5 Total 6,579 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 1,337 20.0
$50,000-$74,999 1,007 15.1 Vehicle Available 681 10.4
$75,000 and Over 689 10.3
Total Households 6,678 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $31,739
Median Family Income $33,657 Below Poverty Level 2,684 12.4
Per Capita Income $12,003 Above Poverty Level 19,040 90.2
Family Type
Families with children 3,101
Married couples 2387 77.0
Female headed 432 13.9
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.20 PUERTO RICAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County - 1990
Population Growth % Immigration %
Age
1960 Not Available American Born 39,401 96.0
1970 Foreign Born 1,647 4.0
1980 36,928 - Immigrated since 1985 Not available
1990 41,048 11.0
Communities with 600+ Persons
0-4 3,687 9.2 Los Angeles 13,535
5-9 3,084 7.7 Long Beach 2,330
10-14 3,056 7.6 West Covina 1,093
15-19 3,250 8.1 Hawthorne 1,032
20-24 3,769 9.4 Glendale 924
25-34 8049 20.1 Carson 783
35-64 12,445 31.0 Pomona 715
65-74 1,625 4.1 Inglewood 701
75+ 1,117 2.8 Norwalk 649
Total 40,082 100.0 Pasadena 644
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 11,965 32.2 Less Than 5th Grade 1,476 6.2
Speak English Very Well 16,473 44.3 5-12th Grade, No Diploma 6,832 28.7
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 5,594 23.5
Very Well 8,745 23.5 Some College 6,808 28.6
Total Age 5 and Over 37,183 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 3,095 13.0
Young Adults Enrolled in College 24.7
Employment
Occupation
In Labor Force 20,479 Managerial/Professional 4,185 22.5
Unemployed 1,918 9.4 Technical/Clerical/Sales 6,934 37.4
Service 2,437 13.1
Employed 18,561 90.6 Farming/Fishing/Forestry 101 0.5
Male 10,432 56.2 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 2,174 11.7
Female 8,129 43.8 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 2,730 14.7
Total 18,561 100.0
Self Employed 801 4.3
Household Income
Housing
Less Than $15,000 3,592 25.5 Own 4,587 32.7
$15,000 - $24,999 2,526 17.9 Rent 9,444 67.3
$25,000 - $34,999 2,104 14.9 Total 14,031 100.0
$35,000 - $49,999 2,324 16.5
$50,000 - $74,999 2,472 17.5 Vehicle Available 11,559 82.4
$75,000 And Over 1,084 7.7
Total Households 14,102 100.0
Poverty Status
Median Household Income $29,561 Below Poverty Level 7,104 17.6
Median Family Income $32,282 Above Poverty Level 33,209 82.4
Per Capita Income $12,509
Family Type
Families with children 5,616
Married couples 3,752 66.8
Female headed 1,471 26.2
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.21 SALVADORAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County - 1990
Population Growth % Immigration %
Age
1960 American Born 42,846 16.9
1970 Not available Foreign Born 210,240 83.1
1980 Immigrated since 1985 Not available
1990
Communities with 1,000+ Persons
0-4 Los Angeles 184,513
5-9 South Gate 4,754
10-14 Inglewood 3,219
15-19 Long Beach 3,196
20-24 Not available Pasadena 1,987
25-34 Pomona 1,350
35-64
65-74
75+
Total
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 7,337 3.2 Less Than 5th Grade 31,507 23.0
Speak English Very Well 58,840 25.6 5-12th Grade, No Diploma 67,811 49.5
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 18,905 13.8
Very Well 164,111 71.3 Some College 14,247 10.4
Total Age 5 and Over 230,288 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 4,521 3.3
Young Adults Enrolled in College 17.9
Employment
Occupation
In Labor Force 140,013 100.0 Managerial/Professional 6,587 5.3
Unemployed 16,637 11.9 Technical/Clerical/Sales 21,463 17.4
. Service 37,107 30.1
Employed 123,376 88.1 Farming/Fishing/Forestry 2,238 1.8
Male 69,886 56.6 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 18,278 14.8
Female 53,510 43.4 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 37,703 30.6
Total 123,376 100.0
Self Employed 6,679 5.4
Household Income
Housing
Less Than $15,000 17,915 29.9 Own 7,552 12.8
$15,000 - $24,999 16,929 28.3 Rent 51,450 87.2
$25,000 - $34,999 11,198 18.7 Total 59,002 100.0
$35,000 - $49,999 8,457 14.1
$50,000 - $74,999 4,049 6.8 Vehicle Available 46,557 78.9
$75,000 And Over 1,326 2.2
Total Households 59,874 100.0
Poverty Status
Median Household Income $21,690 Below Poverty Level 70,668 28.3
Median Family Income $2,063 Above Poverty Level 179,064 71.7
Per Capita Income $6,284
Family Type
Families with children 39,110
Married couples 24,833 63.5
Female headed 8,625 22.1
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.22 SOUTH AMERICAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
Population Growth % Immigration %
1960 American Born 22,028 25.4
1970 Not available Foreign Born 73,359 84.7
1980 Immigrated since 1985 13,284 18.1
1990
Age
Communities with 1,500+ Persons
0-4 Los Angeles 63,649
5-9 Long Beach 5,829
10-14 Lancaster 2,334
15-19 South Gate 2,240
20-24 Not available Glendale 2,195
25-34 Inglewood 1,948
35-64 Norwalk 1,877
65-74 Torrance 1,820
75+ Pasadena 1,806
Total East Los Angeles Unincorporated 1,785
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 7,559 8.5 Less Than 5th Grade 2,651 4.4
Speak English Very Well 38,470 43.1 5-12th Grade, No Diploma 14,894 24.6
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 15,083 24.9
Very Well 43,139 48.4 Some College 18,743 31.0
Total Age 5 and Over 89,168 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 11,738 19.4
Young Adults Enrolled in College 44.9
Employment
In Labor Force 57,564 100.0 Occupation
Unemployed 3,998 6.9 Managerial/Professional 12,411 23.2
. Technical/Clerical/Sales 17,726 33.1
Employed 53,511 93.0 Service 7,915 14.8
Male 30,033 100.0 Farming/Fishing/Forestry 282 0.5
Female 23,478 78.2 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 6,594 12.3
Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 8,583 16.0
Self Employed 5,226 17.4 Total 53,511 100.0
Household Income
Less Than $15,000 6,331 19.8 Housing
$15,000 - $24,999 5,383 16.8 Own 12,508 39.7
$25,000 - $34,999 5,233 16.4 Rent 19,020 60.3
$35,000 - $49,999 6,137 19.2 Total 31,528 100.0
$50,000 - $74,999 5,443 17.0
$75,000 And Over 3,449 10.8 Vehicle Available 28,534 90.5
Total Households 31,976 100.0
Median Household Income $32,373 Poverty Status
Median Family Income $35,431 Below Poverty Level 11,561 13.9
Per Capita Income $13,742 Above Poverty Level 82,958 100.0
Family Type
Families with children 14,150
Married couples 10,929 77.2
Female headed 2,297 16.2
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.23 VENEZUELAN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 579 26.9
1970 Foreign Born 1,572 73.1
1980 Immigrated since 1985 355 16.5
1990 2,151
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 1,003
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-34
35-64
65-74
75+ not available
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 308 15.8 Less than 5th Grade 3.6
Speak English Very Well 932 47.8 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 15.0
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 15.8
Very Well 708 36.3 Some College 34.2
Total Age 5 and over 1,948 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 31.4
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 44.6
Occupation
In Labor Force 1,207 100.0 Managerial/Professional 378 33.2
Unemployed 68 5.6 Technical /Clerical Sales 369 32.4
Service 140 12.3
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 0 0.0
Male 699 57.9 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 139 12.2
Female 440 36.5 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 113 9.9
Total 1,139 100.0
Self Employed 110 9.1
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 87 12.1 Own 228 33.5
$15,000-$24,999 113 15.7 Rent 453 66.5
$25,000-$34,999 118 16.4 Total 681 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 165 22.9
$50,000-$74,999 124 17.2 Vehicle Available 612 89.9
$75,000 and Over 102 14.1
Total Households 721 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $38,864
Median Family Income $42,321 Below Poverty Level 225 10.6
Per Capita Income $17,680 Above Poverty Level 1,898 89.4
Family Type
Families with children 304
Married couples 249
Female headed 39
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Population Growth
Table 1.24 ALL OTHER HISPANIC ORIGIN POPULATION PROFILE
Los Angeles County, 1990
% %
Immigration
1960 not available American Born 91,389 62.0
1970 Foreign Born 55,994 38.0
1980 Immigrated since 1985 10,272 7.0
1990 147,383
Age Communities with 1,000+
0-4 not available Los Angeles 63,649
5-9 Long Beach 5,829
10-14 Glendale 2,195
15-19 Santa Clarita 1,021
20-24 Torrance 3,786
25-34 Lancaster 2,334
35-64 Burbank 1,263
65-74 Pasadena 1,806
75+ not available Lakewood 1,304
Language
Education - Adults
English Only 45,935 35.3 Less than 5th Grade 8.5
Speak English Very Well 44,676 34.3 5-12 Grade, No Diploma 30.9
Do Not Speak English High School Graduate 21.5
Very Well 39,503 30.4 Some College 24.1
Total Age 5 and over 130,114 100.0 Bachelor's Degree or Higher 15.0
Employment
Young Adults (18-24) in College 25.4
Occupation
In Labor Force 1,459 100.0 Managerial/Professional 12,489 20.8
Unemployed 40 2.7 Technical /Clerical Sales 18,970 31.6
Service 9,436 15.7
Employed: Farming/Fishing/Forestry 916 1.5
Male 679 46.5 Precision Prod./Craft Repair 7,002 11.7
Female 740 50.7 Operators/Fabricators/Laborers 11,252 18.7
Total 60,065 100
Self Employed 277 19.0
Household Income
Housing
Less than $15,000 8,281 23.3 Own 15,586 43.9
$15,000-$24,999 6,035 17.0 Rent 19,935 56.1
$25,000-$34,999 5,370 15.1 Total 35,521 100.0
$35,000-$49,999 5,980 16.8
$50,000-$74,999 5,803 16.3 Vehicle Available 31,021 87.3
$75,000 and Over 4,122 11.6
Total Households 35,591 100.0
Poverty Status - Persons
Median Household Income $31,246
Median Family Income $33,844 Below Poverty Level 27,061 19.6
Per Capita Income $10,792 Above Poverty Level 110,688 80.4
Family Type
Families with children 12,207
Married couples 8,167 66.9
Female headed 3,052 25.0
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.25 AGE STRUCTURE AND MEDIAN AGE TRENDS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1960-2003
Race/Ethnic Group 1998
African American Asian
Age Group Total % American % Indian % Pacific % White % Latino %
0-4 756,234 8.1 66,644 7.5 1,154 5.1 64,972 5.9 152,788 4.8 451,700 10.9
5-9 742,398 7.9 77,382 8.7 1,314 5.8 65,100 5.9 156,958 4.9 412,352 10.0
10-14 666,016 7.1 73,002 8.2 1,158 5.1 61,885 5.6 138,583 4.4 370,797 9.0
15-24 1,219,100 13.0 118,608 13.4 2,713 11.9 149,313 13.6 279,859 8.8 641,407 15.5
25-29 764,122 8.2 64,950 7.3 1,816 8.0 86,970 7.9 198,419 6.3 407,232 9.8
30-34 796,558 8.5 77,285 8.7 2,211 9.7 93,408 8.5 279,345 8.8 413,592 10.0
35-39 819,164 8.8 80,502 9.1 2,357 10.4 106,069 9.6 312,069 9.8 358,885 8.7
40-44 754,940 8.1 70,099 7.9 2,163 9.5 106,419 9.7 290,021 9.1 291,869 7.1
45-49 642,377 6.9 59,394 6.7 1,889 8.3 93,946 8.5 257,072 8.1 216,645 5.2
50-54 509,103 5.4 45,045 5.1 1,693 7.5 68,665 6.2 216,099 6.8 155,681 3.8
55-59 388,636 4.2 38,267 4.3 1,279 5.6 52,337 4.8 170,102 5.4 113,412 2.7
60-64 310,976 3.3 31,982 3.6 958 4.2 40,481 3.7 147,961 4.7 88,856 2.1
65-69 282,688 3.0 25,461 2.9 687 3.0 34,226 3.1 148,822 4.7 75,698 1.8
70-74 249,322 2.7 21,786 2.5 526 2.3 29,603 2.7 141,467 4.5 57,346 1.4
75-79 192,900 2.1 16,279 1.8 349 1.5 22,522 2.0 118,122 3.7 37,207 0.9
80-84 126,172 1.4 10,263 1.2 221 1.0 13,279 1.2 81,934 2.6 21,879 0.5
85+ 122,350 1.3 9,427 1.1 229 1.0 10,223 0.9 84,026 2.6 20,563 0.5
Total 9,343,055 100.0 886,377 100.0 22,717 100.0 1,099,417 100.0 3,173,648 100.0 4,135,120 100.0
Median Age 1960-2003
Race/Ethnic Group 1960 1970 1980 1990 1995 1998 2003
African American n/a n/a 26.3 29.8 29.9 30.9 31.6
American Indian n/a n/a 26.4 29.3 30.2 33.6 33.5
Asian Pacific n/a n/a 29.7 31.4 31.3 34.8 37.0
White n/a n/a ** 37.3 ** ** **
Latino 23.0 24.5 26.4 27.2 28.7
Total Population 30.0 29.2 29.8 30.7 32.1 33.4 34.7
* Race and Hispanic origin("Latino") are mutually exclusive in this table. Race categories are non-Hispanic, and Latino includes persons of Hispanic origin of any race.
Total includes "Other" races not shown above.
** Not Available for non-Hispanic White.
Source: U.S. Census of Population 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990; Claritas 1998 estimate.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.26 AGE STRUCTURE - LATINO
Los Angeles County, 1960-2040
Persons
Age Group 1960 % 1970 % 1980 % 1990 % 2000 % 2010 % 2020 % 2030 % 2040 %
0-4 90,449 16 163,451 13 253,731 12 371,727 11 538,045 12 584,719 11 742,119 12 828,767 11 966,065 11
5-9 75,100 13 163,088 13 223,899 11 322,662 10 572,181 13 540,352 10 654,467 10 781,917 10 879,910 10
10-14 58,761 10 147,453 11 195,918 9 290,472 9 403,238 9 535,938 10 572,157 9 729,678 10 816,419 9
15-24 86,478 15 235,646 18 458,597 22 699,086 21 648,445 14 965,701 18 1,038,065 16 1,185,075 16 1,469,313 17
25-29 45,913 8 * * 379,488 11 346,535 8 330,968 6 536,730 8 492,575 6 604,895 7
30-34 49,409 9 195,785 15 389,659 19 325,655 10 414,877 9 307,007 6 371,865 6 482,740 6 516,909 6
35-39 42,336 7 * * 246,149 7 385,939 9 340,630 6 315,027 5 517,023 7 473,536 5
40-44 30,248 5 161,026 12 218,597 11 178,605 5 318,920 7 405,569 8 295,237 5 360,208 5 469,347 5
45-49 24,339 4 * * 130,906 4 244,316 5 375,437 7 327,886 5 306,345 4 504,964 6
50-54 20,765 4 107,059 8 152,582 7 98,455 3 175,710 4 307,344 6 388,009 6 287,014 4 351,368 4
55-59 18,379 3 35,411 3 * 76,541 2 123,541 3 232,382 4 353,560 6 316,312 4 296,755 3
60-64 12,574 2 27,783 2 94,825 5 64,734 2 90,884 2 162,808 3 282,013 4 367,974 5 273,576 3
65-69 9,010 2 * * 47,818 1 72,249 2 110,039 2 204,238 3 326,353 4 293,841 3
70-74 6,622 1 36,114 3 50,365 2 30,239 1 59,333 1 76,470 1 134,683 2 249,728 3 328,927 4
75-79 * * * 21,625 1 41,745 1 56,048 1 83,143 1 168,829 2 272,593 3
80-84 * * * 12,285 0 23,716 1 40,177 1 50,398 1 98,823 1 185,152 2
85+ 6,333 1 16,495 1 27,930 1 9,669 0 23,151 1 35,149 1 49,668 1 81,381 1 166,337 2
Total
Latino 576,716 100 1,289,311 100 2,066,103 100 3,306,116 100 4,482,825 100 5,406,738 100 6,399,265 100 7,580,742 100 8,869,907 100
Total
Population 6,038,771 7,032,075 7,477,503 8,901,987 9,838,861 10,604,452 11,575,693 12,737,077 13,888,161
* Included on line below.
Latino includes persons who reported being of Hispanic origin. These figures include Hispanics whose race was reported as Black, American Indian,
Asian Pacific, White and Other.
Sources: U.S. Census of Population, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990.
California Department of Finance projections, 2000-2040.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

ETHNIC CHILDREN'S SCORE CARD 1999 - Table 1.27
Year Total Black Asian White Latino
1 CHILD POPULATION 1998 2,537,449 261,285 264,129 544,312 1,458,136
2 Total births (child's race) 1997 162,036 17,051 16,140 25,489 101,144
GOOD HEALTH
3 Births with prenatal care in first trimester 1997 133,701 80% 87% 90% 80%
4 Births at normal weight (2500 gr.+) 1997 149,637 84.9% 92.9% 93.0% 93.3%
5 Infant deaths 1997 946 189 55 169 532
6 Infant death rate (per 1,000 live births) 1997 5.9 11.1 3.4 6.6 5.3
7 Births to teens 10-17 1997 7,645 884 161 437 6,140
8 Children with health insurance 1997 75% 86% 80% 90% 67%
9 Children fully immunized at age 2 1999 60% 55% 71% 68% 60%
10 Nutrition: short stature 1997 6% 7% 7% 6% 6%
11 underweight 1997 2% 3% 4% 3% 3%
12 overweight 1997 14% 11% 11% 12% 14%
13 anemic 1997 13% 20% 14% 12% 13%
14 Tuberculosis cases reported age 0-14 1997 87 10 18 5 54
15 Children 0-12 with HIV/AIDS (cumulative) 1998 615 204 13 137 252
16 Teens 13-19 with AIDS (cumulative) 1999 151 35 5 32 77
17 Child deaths age 0-17 1997 1,599 297 113 296 893
18 Child death rate (per 100,000 age 0-17) 1997 58.0 105.1 38.0 48.6 57.1
SAFETY AND SURVIVAL
19 Total Children's Services Caseload (December) 1999* 59,657 25,285 1,561 9,909 22,305
20 Emergency Response cases 1999* 1,048 310 55 152 467
21 Family Maintenance (in-home) 1999* 10,200 2,350 858 1,586 5,278
22 Family Reunification (out of home) 1999* 12,448 4,238 282 2,224 5,590
23 Permanent Placement 1999* 35,961 18,387 366 5,947 10,970
24 Violent felony arrests - juveniles 1998 6,226 2,075 n/a 638 3,132
25 Violent felony arrest rate (per 100,000 age 10-17) 1998 608.6 1,911.0 n/a 286.7 556.1
26 Juveniles incarcerated - Calif.Youth Authority 1999* 2,051 834 75 84 1,047
27 Accidental deaths (0-19) 1997 239 27 20 52 140
28 Accidental death rate (per 100,000 age 0-19) 1997 8.0 9.5 6.7 8.6 7.8
29 Homicide deaths age 0-19 1990-94** 2,234 617 109 175 1,333
30 Homicide death rate (per 100,000 age 0-19) 1990-94** 21.2 53.3 8.5 5.8 25.3
31 Firearm homicides age 0-19 (incl.in homicide) 1990-94** 1,899 535 84 114 1,166
ECONOMIC WELL-BEING
32 Above poverty level 1998 1,687,404 174,263 207,319 472,293 827,180
33 Below poverty level 1998 850,045 87,022 56,810 72,019 630,956
34 Child poverty rate 1998 33% 33% 22% 13% 43%
SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL WELL-BEING
35 Children in two-parent families 1998-99 69% 32% 78% 76% 70%
36 Children in one-parent families 1998-99 27% 57% 20% 22% 26%
37 Children not living with their parents 1998-99 4% 12% 2% 2% 4%
38 Suicide deaths age 0-19 1990-94** 294 33 35 106 120
39 Suicide rate per 100,000 age 0-19 1990-94** 2.9 2.9 2.9 4.0 2.4
40 Children in Mental Health caseload 1997-98 58,466 9,209 801 13,398 11,597
EDUCATION/WORKFORCE READINESS
41 Public school enrollment 1998-99 1,617,764 189,639 168,427 320,253 932,964
42 Students fluent in English or bilingual 1998-99 1,049,783 189,639 121,368 298,932 433,453
43 Students with limited English proficiency 1998-99 567,981 - 47,059 21,321 499,511
44 High school graduates 1998 72,135 7,787 12,574 18,860 32,696
45 High school graduation rate 1998 60% 53% 90% 73% 50%
46 Graduates with courses for UC admission 1998 40% 26% 63% 45% 36%
47 High school graduates entering Calif. public colleges 1998 48% 44% 63% 42% 40%
This score card uses measures from the Los Angeles County Children's Score Card which are available by race/ethnic group.
American Indian and Other groups not shown due to lack of data. Data are most recent statistics available. All data shown are
for one year unless indicated by: *one month or **5 years to provide more reliable figures for race/ethnic groups.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

ETHNIC CHILDREN'S SCORE CARD 1999 - Table 1.27
DATA SOURCES FOR CHILDREN'S SCORE CARD BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
1 Claritas estimate
2 DHS
3 DHS
4 L.A. County DHS, Data Collection and Analysis
5 L.A. County DHS, Data Collection and Analysis
6 L.A. County DHS, Data Collection and Analysis
7 L.A. County DHS, Data Collection and Analysis
8 L.A. County DHS, LA County Health Survey 1997
9 L.A. County DHS, Immunization Program
10 L.A. County DHS, CHDP
11 L.A. County DHS, CHDP
12 L.A. County DHS, CHDP
13 L.A. County DHS, CHDP
14 L.A. County DHS, Tuberculosis Control Program
15 L.A. County DHS, Pediatric Spectrum of Disease 1998 Summary
16 L.A. County DHS, HIV Epidemiology Program 9/30/99
17 California DHS, Center for Health Statistics
18 California DHS, Center for Health Statistics
19 L.A. County Department of Children's Services
20 L.A. County Department of Children's Services
21 L.A. County Department of Children's Services
22 L.A. County Department of Children's Services
23 L.A. County Department of Children's Services
24 Calif.Dept.Crim.Justice
25 Calif.Dept.Crim.Justice
26 California Youth Authority
27 L.A. County DHS, Violence & Injury Prevention Program
28 L.A. County DHS, Violence & Injury Prevention Program
29 L.A. County DHS, Pediatric Injury Mortality Report
30 L.A. County DHS, Pediatric Injury Mortality Report
31 L.A. County DHS, Pediatric Injury Mortality Report
32 L.A. County Chief Administrative Office Urban Research and CPS
33 L.A. County Chief Administrative Office Urban Research and CPS
34 L.A. County Chief Administrative Office Urban Research and CPS
35 Current Population Survey, 1998-99 average
36 Current Population Survey, 1998-99 average
37 Current Population Survey, 1998-99 average
38 L.A. County DHS, Pediatric Injury Mortality Report
39 L.A. County DHS, Pediatric Injury Mortality Report
40 L.A. County DHS, Mental Health Department
41 California Department of Education
42 California Department of Education
43 California Department of Education
44 California Department of Education
45 California Department of Education
46 California Department of Education
47 California Postsecondary Education Commission
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.28 CHILDREN LIVING WITH PARENTS
Los Angeles County, 1998-1999 Average
Children 0-17
Race Total Both Parents % Mother Only % Father Only %
Not Living
With Parent %
Latino 1,580,753 100.0 1,106,075 70.0 361,066 22.8 56,806 3.6 56,806 3.6
African American 251,526 100.0 80,601 32.0 132,779 52.8 9,204 3.7 28,942 11.5
Asian 257,188 100.0 200,159 77.8 47,363 18.4 4,833 1.9 4,833 1.9
White 777,108 100.0 586,509 75.5 154,717 19.9 17,941 2.3 17,941 2.3
Total 2,866,575 100.0 1,973,344 68.8 695,925 24.3 88,784 3.1 108,522 3.8
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey March Supplement: 1998, 1999. .
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.29 CHILDREN'S FAMILY TYPE BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 0-17
African American Asian
Children's Family/Household Type Total % American % Indian % Pacific % White % Latino %
Living with parents:
Married couple family 1,488,784 64.0 100,142 34.9 6,785 53.4 195,908 79.0 478,110 74.9 726,318 61.9
Mother only 377,782 16.2 106,273 37.0 2,776 21.9 21,329 8.6 78,822 12.3 175,254 14.9
Father only 117,118 5.0 14,497 5.1 834 6.6 6,967 2.8 24,656 3.9 72,451 6.2
Living with:
Grandparent 150,217 6.5 40,000 13.9 1,134 8.9 9,426 3.8 31,652 5.0 70,616 6.0
Other relatives 111,464 4.8 13,072 4.6 530 4.2 9,810 4.0 9,171 1.4 80,625 6.9
Non-relatives 65,547 2.8 9,479 3.3 497 3.9 3,771 1.5 12,699 2.0 40,336 3.4
Institutionalized 6,302 0.3 2,032 0.7 87 0.7 225 0.1 1,424 0.2 2,681 0.2
Other group quarters 5,305 0.2 869 0.3 35 0.3 274 0.1 969 0.2 3,277 0.3
Married or living on own 3,591 0.2 494 0.2 22 0.2 221 0.1 779 0.1 2,138 0.2
Total under 18 2,326,110 100.0 286,858 100.0 12,700 100.0 247,931 100.0 638,282 100.0 1,173,696 100.0
Data for race groups is for non-Hispanic population. The Latino category includes, Blacks, American Indians and Asians of Hispanic origin. Total is unduplicated.
Family type specified child's relationship to householder, e.g. "Grandparent" means that child lives in a household where grandparent is identified as the
householder (equivalent to "head of household" in earlier censuses).
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990, CP-1-6.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.30 YOUTH AGE 16-19, WORKING OR ENROLLED IN SCHOOL
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 16-19*
African American Asian American Indian White Latino
School/Labor Force Status Total % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %
Not Enrolled in school: 137,134 26.4% 14,612 25.3% 6,114 10.2% 858 34.1% 27,072 18.8% 88,478 34.7%
Not high school graduate 90,098 17.4% 7,483 12.9% 3,132 5.2% 534 21.2% 10,825 7.5% 68,124 26.7%
Employed 39,258 43.6% 1,470 19.6% 966 30.8% 188 35.2% 4,722 43.6% 31,912 46.8%
Unemployed 13,149 14.6% 1,335 17.8% 402 12.8% 78 14.6% 1,757 16.2% 9,577 14.1%
Not in labor force 37,572 41.7% 4,678 62.5% 1,764 56.3% 268 50.2% 4,277 39.5% 26,585 39.0%
Not HS Grad, not in L.F. 7.2% 8.1% 2.9% 10.7% 3.0% 10.4%
Total age 16-19 519,194 100.0% 57,810 100.0% 59,952 100.0% 2,513 100.0% 143,713 100.0% 255,206 100.0%
*Persons age 16-19, not in armed forces. White figures for non-Hispanic White.
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.31 YOUTH POVERTY, BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1970-1998
Persons 0-17 Below Poverty Level*
Race/Ethnic Group 1970 % 1980 % 1990 % 1998 %
Latino 95,588 17.9 197,254 25.4 322,349 28.5 630,956 43.3
African American 95,294 30.4 94,040 30.9 86,525 31.4 87,022 33.3
Asian Pacific - 18,525 15.0 39,893 16.4 56,810 21.5
American Indian - 3,124 20.2 2,588 24.7 3,238 33.8
White 101,057** 4.5 162,825 13.6 51,944 8.1 72,019 13.2
Total*** 291,939 14.2 375,214 19.0 496,504 21.9 850,045 33.5
* Age and ethnic data available only for related children for 1970 and 1980. 1990, 1998 figure are total persons under 18.
** Includes White, Asian, Indian, Other.
*** Total is an unduplicated figure.
except for White, which is Non-Hispanic for 1990 and 1998.
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1970, 1980, 1990. Current Population Survey 1998.
Latino Profiles Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.32 CHILDREN'S SERVICES CASELOAD BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, December 1999
Children under DCFS Supervision
Emergency Response Family Maintenance Family Reunification Permanent Placement
Race Number % Number % Number % Number % Total
Latino 467 44.6% 5,278 51.7% 5,590 44.9% 10,970 30.5% 22,305
African American 310 29.6% 2,350 23.0% 4,238 34.0% 18,387 51.1% 25,285
American Indian 13 1.2% 44 0.4% 59 0.5% 223 0.6% 339
Asian Pacific 55 5.2% 858 8.4% 282 2.3% 366 1.0% 1,561
White 152 14.5% 1,586 15.5% 2,224 17.9% 5,949 16.5% 9,911
Not Reported 51 4.9% 84 0.8% 55 0.4% 66 0.2% 256
Total 1,048 100.0% 10,200 100.0% 12,448 100.0% 35,961 100.0% 59,657
Source: Los Angeles Department of Children & Family Services.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.33 CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT CASELOAD CHARACTERISTICS
Los Angeles County, December 1999
Number
Percent
Total Cases 59,657 100.0
Rate Per 1,000 Age 0-19 21.6 not applicable
Race/Ethnic Group
Latino 22,305 37.4
African American 25,285 42.4
American Indian 339 0.6
Asian Pacific 1,561 2.6
White 9,911 16.6
Other/not reported 256 0.4
Program
Emergency Response 1,048 1.8
Family Maintenance 10,200 17.1
Family Reunification 12,448 20.9
Permanent Placement 35,961 60.3
Gender
Male 29,246 49.0
Female 30,394 50.9
Other/not reported 17 0.0
Age
Birth-2 7,444 12.5
3-5 10,569 17.7
6-12 25,586 42.9
13-15 9,058 15.2
16-17 5,047 8.5
18+ 1,951 3.3
Source: Los Angeles Department of Children & Family Services.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.34 CHILD ABUSE DEATHS CHARACTERISTICS OF VICTIMS
Los Angeles County, 1984-1997
Child Abuse Deaths
Characteristics of Victims 1984 1986 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Total 37 52 58 42 45 61 46 41 39 49 53 45
Ethnicity of Victim
Latino - - - 12 21 18 16 20 18 23 27 21
African American - - - 9 13 14 16 10 14 11 11 14
Asian/Other - - - 4 3 9 2 3 1 4 1 4
White - - - 17 9 19 12 8 6 11 14 6
Age of Victim
0 - 11 months - - - 19 20 34 17 20 16 23 14 20
1 - 4 years - - - 16 14 21 27 17 22 21 25 18
5 - 17 years - - - 7 11 6 2 4 1 5 14 7
Sex of Victim
Male - - - 18 21 35 25 16 27 35 28 28
Female - - - 24 25 26 21 25 12 14 25 17
Cause of Death
Blunt force/other trauma - - - 27 22 37 28 26 30 31 27 29
Drowning - - - 1 2 5 2 1 1 4 0 2
Gunshot - - - 6 11 5 3 2 2 4 4 7
Residential fire - - - 0 2 0 3 1 0 3 8 0
Stabbing - - - 0 0 2 3 1 0 0 2 0
Other - - - 8 9 17 7 10 6 7 12 14
Prior Involvement with
Department of Children
and Family Services - - - 11 11 11 11 13 12 15 13 15
Source: Los Angeles County Interagency Council on Child Abuse and Neglect (ICAN), Child Death Report (Annual).
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.35 HIV POSITIVE CHILDREN BY TRANSMISSION
CATEGORY AND RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1998
Transmission
Perinatal
Mother's risk factor
Total
African
American Asian/Other White Latino
Unknown, but mother has HIV/AIDS 153 69 3 12 69
IV drug user 107 52 5 31 19
Transfusion 20 4 0 3 13
Heterosexual 163 39 4 29 91
Perinatal total 443 164 12 75 192
Transfusion 123 33 6 39 45
Hemophilia/Coagulation disorder 39 2 4 21 12
Other/Unknown 10 5 0 2 3
Total 615 204 22 137 252
Source: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Pediatric Spectrum of Disease 1998
Year-End Summary Report.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.36 ACCIDENTAL CHILD DEATHS BY CAUSE/RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1997
Cause of death
Total
Child Deaths 0-17
African
American Asian Pacific White Latino
Drowning 33 17 1 9 16
Falls 3 0 0 1 2
Fire/burns 4 0 0 1 3
Suffocation 8 1 0 2 5
Poisoning 8 0 0 4 4
Motor vehicle accidents 154 16 17 29 92
Firearms 2 0 0 0 2
Other 27 3 2 6 16
Total 239 37 20 52 140
Source: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services.
California Highway Patrol.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.37 YOUTH HOMICIDE BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1980-1996
Homicide Deaths, Age 15-19*
Asian African American
Year Total Pacific American White Indian/Other Latino
1980 272 2 104 162 4 -
1981 201 2 85 111 3 -
1982 141 1 57 83 0 -
1983 144 0 64 79 1 -
1984 156 1 63 90 2 -
1985 174 6 73 23 1 71
1986 196 1 94 22 0 79
1987 222 6 112 18 1 85
1988 224 7 101 24 0 92
1989 313 7 116 26 1 163
1990 308 6 85 26 3 188
1991 366 11 105 31 4 215
1992 352 6 79 27 0 240
1993 348 14 111 15 0 208
1994 347 23 101 24 0 199
1995 361 20 78 25 2 236
1996 303 14 73 20 0 196
* Includes homicide and legal intervention.
Source: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.38 ELDERLY POPULATION BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1960-1998
Persons 65 and Over
Race/Ethnic Group 1960 % 1970 % 1980 % 1990 % 1998 %
Latino - 52,609 8.1 78,295 10.5 132,278 15.4 212,692 21.7
African American - 39,119 6.0 62,239 8.4 81,779 9.5 83,217 8.5
American Indian - - 2,230 0.3 2,630 0.3 2,012 0.2
Asian Pacific - - 27,425 3.7 71,801 8.3 109,852 11.2
White/Other - 560,671 85.9 623,123 83.9 572,099 66.5 574,370 58.5
Total 553,238 652,399 91.9 743,005 100.0 860,587 84.6 982,143 78.3
In this table race and Hispanic origin overlap for 1970-1990 since Latinos may be of any race. Totals are unduplicated. 1998 figures
do not overlap.
Sources: U.S. Census of Population, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990.
Claritas, 1998.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.39 ELDERLY BY RACE/ETHNIC AND AGE GROUPS
Los Angeles County, 1998
Persons Age 65 and Over
African American Asian
Age Group Total % American % Indian % Pacific % White* % Latino %
65-69 284,894 3.1 25,461 2.9 687 3.0 34,226 3.1 148,822 4.7 75,698 1.8
70-74 250,728 2.7 21,786 2.5 526 2.3 29,603 2.7 141,467 4.5 57,346 1.4
75-79 194,480 2.1 16,279 1.8 349 1.5 22,522 2.0 118,122 3.7 37,207 0.9
80-84 127,574 1.4 10,263 1.2 221 1.0 13,279 1.2 81,934 2.6 21,879 0.5
85+ 124,469 1.3 9,427 1.1 229 1.0 10,223 0.9 84,026 2.6 20,563 0.5
Total Elderly 982,144 10.5 83,217 9.4 2,012 8.9 109,852 10.0 574,370 18.1 212,692 5.1
Total All Ages 9,317,279 100.0 886,377 100.0 22,717 100.0 1,099,417 100.0 3,173,648 100.0 4,135,120 100.0
*Not available for non-Hispanic White
Source: U.S Census of Population 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990
Claritas, 1998.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.40 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT - ELDERLY BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 65 and Over
Level of Education Completed
Total
African
American
Asian
Pacific White Latino
Less than 9th Grade 229,787 27,421 30,410 79,293 92,663
9th to 12th grade, no diploma 273,484 28,905 20,171 187,398 37,010
High school graduate 310,257 25,997 25,817 231,028 27,415
Some college or associate degree 241,311 20,264 16,625 188,965 15,457
Bachelor’s degree or higher 171,218 9,375 16,448 138,543 6,852
Total 1,226,057 111,962 109,471 825,227 179,397
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990. No more recent data available.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.41 ELDERLY BELOW POVERTY LEVEL, BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1970-1997
Persons 65+ Below Poverty Level
Age/Race 1970 % 1980 % 1990 % 1995 % 1997 %
Race/Ethnicity *
Latino 10,291 9,504 12.1 17,136 14.4 - 40,270 18.5
African American 10,601 10,256 16.5 13,191 14.4 n.a. 12,194 14.4
American Indian - 285 12.8 284 10.1 - 423 9.7
Asian Pacific - 3,165 11.5 7,173 10.3 - 16,539 13.5
White/Other - 46,754 7.5 46,649 7.6 - 59,952 10.3
Total 96,555 14.8 69,964 9.2 84,433 9.2 - 129,378 12.8
* For 1980 and 1990 Race and Latino ethnicity overlap, since Latinos may be of any race. The total is unduplicated. For 1997 race and ethnicity do not overlap.
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1970, 1980, 1990.
Los Angeles County Chief Administrative Office, Urban Research Division, 1995-1997.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.42 LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION OF OLDER PERSONS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990
Sex/Age
Total
Percent in Labor Force
African
American Asian Pacific White Latino
MALE
55-64 71.1 58.5 74.2 72.8 71.0
65-69 33.4 21.9 35.2 35.7 29.3
70+ 14.7 10.8 12.3 15.9 12.1
FEMALE
55-64 48.6 46.8 47.9 51.4 43.0
65-69 20.0 17.7 18.3 22.1 14.6
70+ 6.5 6.1 5.0 6.8 6.3
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.43 LIVING ARRANGEMENTS OF ELDERLY BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 60 +
Living Arrangements
Total
African
American %
American
Indian % Asian % White % Latino %
Persons 60 to 64 years
In households 314,241 32,085 98.2 1,272 99.1 31,893 99.5 184,677 98.8 64,314 99.4
In group quarters 3,326 589 1.8 11 0.9 155 0.5 2,151 1.2 420 0.6
Nursing homes 1,694 322 11 49 1,090 222
Total 317,567 32,674 100.0 1,283 100.0 32,048 100.0 186,828 100.0 64,734 100.0
Persons 65 to 74 years
In households 499,424 49,931 97.4 1,623 95.9 47,074 99.1 323,896 97.7 76,900 98.5
In group quarters 10,509 1,330 2.6 69 4.1 440 0.9 7,513 2.3 1,157 1.5
Nursing homes 7,480 878 37 365 5,470 730
Total 509,933 51,261 100.0 1,692 100.0 47,514 100.0 331,409 100.0 78,057 100.0
Persons 75 years and over
In households 311,761 28,110 92.6 899 93.9 22,315 95.1 219,145 87.7 41,292 94.8
In group quarters 36,425 2,248 7.4 58 6.1 1,150 4.9 30,682 12.3 2,287 5.2
Nursing homes 33,115 1,908 58 1,087 28,026 2,036
Total 348,186 30,358 100.0 957 100.0 23,465 100.0 249,827 100.0 43,579 100.0
Persons 60+
In households 1,125,426 110,126 96.4 3,794 96.5 101,282 98.3 727,718 94.7 182,506 97.9
In group quarters 50,260 4,167 3.6 138 3.5 1,745 1.7 40,346 5.3 3,864 2.1
Nursing homes 42,289 3,108 2.7 106 1,501 34,586 2,988
Total 1,175,686 114,293 100.0 3,932 100.0 103,027 100.0 768,064 100.0 186,370 100.0
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.44 FOREIGN-BORN PERSONS BY PLACE OF BIRTH
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons by Continent/Nation
Europe 231,272 Asia (cont.) North America (cont.)
Austria 4,351 Indonesia 10,990 Central America 396,215
Belgium 1,963 Japan 40,293 Belize 11,929
Czechoslovakia 4,521 Korea 114,696 Costa Rica 8,062
Denmark 2,360 Laos 3,432 El Salvador 213,103
Estonia 375 Malaysia 2,685 Guatemala 107,559
Finland 1,185 Pakistan 6,222 Honduras 19,891
France 8,164 Philippines 161,006 Nicaragua 28,650
Germany 26,685 Taiwan 49,370 Panama 5,275
Greece 6,854 Thailand 17,189 South America 86,683
Hungary 8,862 Vietnam 76,539 Argentina 15,115
Ireland 5,027 Middle East 231,500 Bolivia 2,978
Italy 14,654 Armenian descent* 105,333 Brazil 5,762
Latvia 953 Iran 67,799 Chile 6,949
Lithuania 1,487 Iraq 5,053 Colombia 16,761
Netherlands 6,707 Israel 14,528 Ecuador 14,105
Norway 1,392 Jordan 2,780 Guyana 2,018
Poland 13,421 Lebanon 17,839 Peru 18,499
Portugal 2,158 Saudi Arabia 836 Uruguay 1,349
Romania 8,247 Syria 9,179 Venezuela 2,006
Spain 4,496 Turkey 8,153 Africa 28,850
Sweden 3,372 North America 1,654,225 Cape Verde 8
Switzerland 2,680 Canada 43,554 Egypt 10,271
United Kingdom 39,710 Mexico 1,166,754 Ethiopia 2,890
Yugoslavia 7,456 Caribbean 47,492 Ghana 780
Soviet Union 51,992 Bahamas 226 Morocco 1,753
Asia 624,907 Barbados 602 Nigeria 2,900
Afghanistan 2,229 Cuba 34,154 South Africa 3,363
Burma 4,000 Dominican Republic 1,426 Oceania 10,366
Cambodia 24,851 Grenada 297 Australia 3,562
China 67,199 Haiti 1,274 New Zealand 1,253
Hong Kong 19,946 Jamaica 5,359
India 24,260 Trinidad & Tobago 2,467 Total Foreign Born** 2,895,066
*Persons of Armenian descent; may not be foreign born. **Includes 123,326 with area not reported.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990, CP-2-6.

Table 1.45 IMMIGRANTS ADMITTED BY YEAR AND MAJOR CATEGORY OF ADMISSION
Los Angeles County, 1990-1998
Immigrants*
Year United States L.A. County Percent of U.S.
1990 n.a. 76,185 n.a.
1991 n.a. 76,481 n.a.
1992 n.a. 93,186 n.a.
1993 n.a. 99,372 n.a.
1994 n.a. 77,112 n.a.
1995 720,451 54,669 7.6%
1996 915,900 64,285 7.0%
1997 798,378 62,314 7.8%
1998 660,477 59,598 9.0%
Category of Admission - Los Angeles County Immigrants
(1996 Immigrants Only)
Family Sponsored Preferences 294,174 26,596 9.0%
Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens 32,090 18,714 58.3%
Employment Based Preferences 177,499 7,894 4.4%
Diversity Programs 58,790 3,882 6.6%
IRCA Legalization 4,635 993 21.4%
Refugees and Asylees 128,565 4,439 3.5%
Other 220,147 1,767 0.8%
Total 915,900 64,285 7.0%
*Immigrants admitted to U.S. with intended residence in Los Angeles County. Does not include IRCA immigrants
for 1990-1995.
Sources: State of California, Department of Finance, Legal Immigration to California
by County: Federal Fiscal Year 1990-1995.
U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service [I.N.S. Statistical Yearbook, 1996].
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.46 CITIZENSHIP STATUS, ALL AGES
Los Angeles County, 1998-1999 Average
Persons
U.S. Born Citizen Foreign Born Naturalized Citizen Not a U.S. Citizen
Race* Total % Number % Number % Number %
Latino 4,950,857 100.0 2,429,895 49.1 575,053 11.6 1,945,909 39.3
Black 832,641 100.0 804,431 96.6 13,311 1.6 14,899 1.8
Asian 1,140,058 100.0 378,290 33.2 384,912 33.8 376,856 33.1
White 3,656,206 100.0 3,181,426 87.0 225,243 6.2 249,537 6.8
Total 10,579,762 100.0 6,794,042 64.2 1,198,519 11.3 2,587,201 24.5
*Note: Does not include American Indian or Other categories because small numbers make results unreliable.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement: 1998-1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.47 CITIZENSHIP STATUS OF ADULTS
Los Angeles County, 1994, 1996, 1998
Citizenship Status Total % Non-Latino % Latino %
1994
U.S. Born Citizen 3,871,830 59.7 3,072,024 75.7 799,806 33.0
Foreign Born Naturalized Citizen 548,188 8.5 371,181 9.1 177,007 7.3
Not U.S. Citizen 2,060,592 31.8 614,831 15.2 1,445,761 59.7
Total 6,480,610 100.0 4,058,036 100.0 2,422,574 100.0
1996
U.S. Born Citizen 3,973,020 58.1 3,245,436 75.2 727,584 28.8
Foreign Born Naturalized Citizen 789,263 11.5 510,041 11.8 279,222 11.1
Not U.S. Citizen 2,073,126 30.3 557,772 12.9 1,515,354 60.1
Total 6,835,409 100.0 4,313,249 100.0 2,522,160 100.0
1998
U.S. Born Citizen 3,967,466 56.7 3,199,305 73.9 768,161 28.8
Foreign Born Naturalized Citizen 965,554 13.8 569,720 13.2 395,834 14.8
Not U.S. Citizen 2,067,183 29.5 562,434 13.0 1,504,749 56.4
Total 7,000,203 100.0 4,331,459 100.0 2,668,744 100.0
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey Voting and Registration Supplement:1994, 1996, 1998.
http://ferret.bls.census.gov
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.48 IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION BY COUNTY OF REGION
Los Angeles County and United States, 1997
Immigration
Naturalization
Persons
Persons
Country of Birth or Former Allegiance United States Los Angeles Percent of U.S. United States Los Angeles Percent of U.S.
Bangladesh 8,681 295 3.4% - 0 0.0
Canada 11,609 338 2.9% - 0 0.0
China People's Republic 41,147 4,203 10.2% 17,552 1,858 10.6%
Colombia 13,004 313 2.4% 10,911 455 4.2%
Cuba 33,587 187 0.6% 12,860 676 5.3%
Dominican Republic 27,053 15 0.1% 19,450 23 0.1%
Ecuador 7,780 289 3.7% - 0 0.0%
El Salvador 17,969 4,834 26.9% 17,818 7,452 41.8%
Guatamela 7,785 2,132 27.4% 7,522 3,218 42.8%
Guyana 7,257 46 0.6% - 0 0.0%
Haiti 15,057 21 0.1% 15,667 33 0.2%
Honduras 7,616 644 8.5% 0 0 0.0%
India 38,071 1,318 3.5% 18,812 868 4.6%
Iran 9,642 2,477 25.7% 10,553 4,414 41.8%
Jamaica 17,840 147 0.8% 18,746 165 0.9%
Korea 14,239 2,211 15.5% 13,996 3,124 22.3%
Laos 0 0 0.0% 8,092 90 1.1%
Mexico 146,865 17,470 11.9% 134,494 31,943 23.8%
Nigeria 7,038 223 3.2% 0 0 0.0%
Pakistan 12,967 411 3.2% 0 0 0.0%
Peru 10,853 650 6.0% 0 0 0.0%
Philippines 49,117 6,281 12.8% 28,075 4,885 17.4%
Poland 12,038 100 0.8% 7,553 107 1.4%
Soviet Union (Russia, Ukraine) 16,632 710 4.3% 7,172 755 10.5%
Taiwan 6,745 1,439 21.3% 0 0 0.0%
Trinidad 6,409 64 1.0% 0 0 0.0%
Ukraine 15,696 920 5.9% 0 0 0.0%
United Kingdom 10,708 554 5.2% 11,418 1,118 9.8%
Vietnam 38,519 2,094 5.4% 33,349 3,838 11.5%
Other 186,454 11,928 6.4% 204,185 18,460 9.0%
All Countries 798,378 62,314 7.8% 598,225 83,482 14.0%
Source: U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Statistical Yearbook, 1996.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.49 LATINO INCOME LEVEL BY CITIZENSHIP STATUS
Los Angeles County, 1999
Persons
Income Range
Total Latino
U.S. Born
Citizen %
Foreign Born
Naturalized
Citizen %
Not a U.S.
Citizen %
Less than $25,000 2,460,159 1,162,423 52.4 211,901 51.6 1,085,835 64.7
$25,000 to $49,999 1,164,940 640,176 28.9 122,958 29.9 401,806 23.9
$50,000 - $74,999 393,883 224,812 10.1 44,225 10.8 124,846 7.4
$75,000 and Over 288,444 189,932 8.6 31,924 7.8 66,588 4.0
Total 4,307,426 2,217,343 100.0 411,008 100.0 1,679,075 100.0
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement: 1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.50 LATINO LANGUAGE USE
Los Angeles County, 1999
Language Use
Latino Adults
Language Fluency Yes No
Read/speak any Spanish 85% 15%
Fluent in English and Spanish 54% 46%
Reading Knowledge English Spanish
Excellent 27% 28%
Good 22% 36%
Fair 28% 30%
Poor 21% 5%
Cannot read Spanish/English 3% 0%
Language Preference Reading Speaking
Spanish only 24% 24%
Spanish more than English 19% 20%
English more than Spanish 23% 21%
English only 20% 14%
English and Spanish equally 14% 21%
Other language 0% 0%
Language Spoken Most Away from Home At Home
Spanish only 22% 34%
Spanish more than English 21% 32%
English more than Spanish 31% 19%
English only 18% 10%
English and Spanish equally 8% 5%
Other Language 0% 0%
Source: 1999 Gallup Poll of Media Usage & Consumer Behavior -- Los Angeles Market, Copyright 1999,
The Gallup Organization, Inc.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.51 LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ZIP CODE
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 5 and Over
English
Total
Zip Code Only Spanish Chinese Taglog Korean Japanese Vietnamese Indic Cambodian Age 5+
90001 13,792 31,461 10 59 0 0 0 5 0 45,453
90002 21,568 14,523 0 16 0 13 0 0 0 36,209
90003 24,640 22,115 0 20 0 24 13 43 0 47,252
90004 12,949 27,925 833 4,666 7,228 470 240 365 0 58,721
90005 6,722 17,234 548 1,086 5,424 77 359 27 0 32,422
90006 6,724 40,423 525 682 6,852 567 599 16 0 57,220
90007 15,897 23,667 1,148 91 418 226 210 153 34 42,922
90008 25,694 3,244 148 33 177 409 7 0 0 30,484
90010 1,287 2,795 0 191 673 87 0 7 0 5,151
90011 23,746 59,764 371 44 85 10 52 0 289 84,594
90012 10,012 6,375 7,684 82 323 641 966 0 475 27,386
90013 3,240 1,466 62 5 49 163 0 0 0 5,145
90014 1,506 561 98 23 397 42 0 37 0 2,782
90015 1,779 14,373 118 87 270 40 90 20 0 16,961
90016 26,981 11,195 212 215 257 624 26 15 0 40,231
90017 1,817 16,716 61 319 236 14 13 45 0 19,623
90018 26,657 14,867 247 96 392 511 64 21 0 43,672
90019 30,882 20,826 519 1,254 3,335 1,208 114 136 16 59,918
90020 8,915 9,484 562 2,542 7,459 340 74 576 0 32,188
90021 1,210 1,408 21 0 15 8 0 0 0 2,758
90022 8,140 49,116 164 33 49 191 0 40 18 58,172
90023 3,479 38,423 29 14 0 134 77 0 0 42,276
90024 27,014 1,987 1,730 186 734 635 224 139 8 37,609
90025 22,948 4,663 1,013 362 383 1,440 92 201 0 36,864
90026 14,488 38,564 3,978 6,519 1,143 272 758 31 1,288 68,621
90027 19,235 11,537 562 1,975 1,350 311 25 101 27 47,227
90028 10,644 11,583 141 443 369 247 30 121 0 28,544
90029 5,448 20,208 716 3,952 760 212 36 122 58 37,630
90031 4,712 21,528 8,216 287 67 250 919 15 174 36,545
90032 9,087 27,323 4,162 383 168 256 307 55 9 42,258
90033 5,598 42,547 361 383 114 1,077 208 18 56 50,751
90034 32,399 8,828 968 785 626 496 104 1,390 0 50,347
90035 16,928 1,928 196 116 43 158 19 206 0 24,346
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.51 LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ZIP CODE, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 5 and Over
English
Total
Zip Code Only Spanish Chinese Taglog Korean Japanese Vietnamese Indic Cambodian Age 5+
90036 20,741 1,908 277 409 736 159 0 47 0 28,445
90037 21,700 28,139 190 21 0 0 9 5 0 50,420
90038 6,412 16,991 224 963 1,207 70 253 116 0 30,186
90039 11,793 10,302 878 2,257 285 382 79 30 0 27,398
90040 2,386 6,220 0 0 14 18 0 0 0 8,693
90041 13,498 6,578 681 2,437 180 51 251 110 0 25,163
90042 16,895 29,091 3,316 2,608 253 183 724 30 67 54,812
90043 34,075 6,387 74 31 32 125 22 0 0 41,610
90044 45,333 27,391 110 106 83 49 0 15 0 73,995
90045 26,397 3,994 422 342 198 179 73 199 0 34,163
90046 29,156 3,856 173 223 311 397 23 102 0 46,546
90047 36,549 6,887 43 111 0 43 0 0 0 44,224
90048 13,342 1,177 136 105 138 124 16 18 0 20,590
90049 26,475 1,761 274 61 99 431 0 85 0 33,940
90056 6,954 429 33 24 20 34 0 58 0 7,741
90057 6,511 22,599 411 2,219 1,952 267 204 107 59 34,995
90058 1,176 2,053 6 9 12 0 0 0 311 3,576
90059 19,519 10,950 11 0 12 0 0 0 0 30,585
90061 12,257 6,745 0 0 26 3 0 0 0 19,163
90062 17,303 6,954 396 18 16 73 20 0 0 25,124
90063 7,994 46,710 99 40 12 352 0 0 12 55,428
90064 15,257 3,135 575 172 174 547 62 175 0 22,103
90065 11,430 22,995 2,083 2,672 307 131 204 11 64 41,215
90066 31,551 10,860 986 632 640 1,211 117 353 0 50,164
90067 2,132 123 9 0 9 103 0 0 0 2,631
90068 18,423 3,265 143 114 319 149 0 4 0 24,379
90069 16,021 948 67 7 25 59 14 0 0 20,319
90071 22 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29
90077 5,829 438 130 22 93 16 0 39 0 7,600
90201 13,552 71,516 374 182 88 53 24 155 186 87,085
90210 12,979 1,620 168 118 36 92 0 44 0 19,749
90211 4,697 483 119 12 75 59 0 46 0 7,473
90212 7,053 615 80 57 206 96 0 0 0 10,417
90220 27,757 14,118 6 97 12 7 0 0 0 42,675
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.51 LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ZIP CODE, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 5 and Over
English
Total
Zip Code Only Spanish Chinese Taglog Korean Japanese Vietnamese Indic Cambodian Age 5+
90221 22,003 19,574 8 74 18 0 39 24 22 42,182
90222 12,389 12,741 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 25,238
90230 18,641 7,404 423 380 193 631 389 252 189 30,259
90232 9,742 3,094 128 182 157 405 82 323 0 15,029
90240 11,964 4,256 118 296 762 71 0 72 0 18,789
90241 20,238 7,118 283 349 887 96 148 143 22 31,757
90242 20,400 9,972 309 746 858 70 144 193 85 34,265
90245 12,321 1,000 109 90 14 5 48 44 0 14,333
90247 18,650 10,252 475 1,485 2,429 3,899 400 45 0 38,708
90248 5,394 1,810 145 63 268 945 78 11 0 8,844
90249 16,048 4,466 180 393 614 612 889 54 48 23,853
90250 43,624 18,210 576 1,787 901 338 1,708 960 0 71,517
90254 15,777 804 108 53 37 91 26 0 0 17,543
90255 7,357 55,661 249 354 118 45 96 71 0 64,463
90260 16,019 7,038 329 337 269 150 994 106 12 26,685
90262 17,642 35,830 62 250 91 0 0 109 34 54,752
90265 14,092 1,122 98 60 165 45 7 13 0 16,853
90266 27,373 1,222 167 81 48 205 24 70 0 30,186
90270 2,451 21,795 15 10 0 10 5 41 0 24,555
90272 15,936 951 175 17 228 162 5 52 0 19,511
90274 43,533 1,845 3,414 269 1,565 2,708 30 536 0 57,767
90277 26,800 2,094 69 46 44 463 18 31 0 31,638
90278 27,013 2,747 390 151 221 133 77 52 0 32,463
90280 16,680 59,098 17 359 187 13 33 12 79 77,558
90290 4,448 318 10 0 0 9 0 0 0 5,064
90291 21,394 7,494 80 106 140 153 87 21 0 31,193
90292 13,651 966 116 17 42 343 0 22 17 16,431
90293 9,668 462 85 34 53 72 42 58 0 11,083
90301 15,998 14,971 66 423 68 8 150 116 0 32,692
90302 17,404 7,435 29 99 33 12 54 62 0 25,776
90303 13,326 9,658 15 70 0 0 74 21 0 23,641
90304 4,259 19,891 9 289 7 6 127 59 0 25,016
90305 11,827 1,330 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 13,560
90401 3,509 383 75 4 40 20 15 27 0 4,659
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.51 LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ZIP CODE, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 5 and Over
English
Total
Zip Code Only Spanish Chinese Taglog Korean Japanese Vietnamese Indic Cambodian Age 5+
90402 11,151 753 305 56 39 72 0 89 0 13,965
90403 16,548 760 407 28 122 204 28 40 0 21,593
90404 12,740 5,409 234 147 113 351 28 144 0 21,304
90405 19,323 2,631 315 51 132 251 14 151 0 24,918
90501 20,238 8,978 955 779 905 745 274 147 0 34,485
90502 9,094 2,991 351 857 390 309 111 4 0 14,740
90503 27,953 1,623 1,534 221 2,044 2,099 162 312 8 37,965
90504 19,065 2,224 1,084 443 1,219 2,625 333 136 0 28,397
90505 24,130 1,365 998 212 1,096 1,596 145 214 0 32,029
90601 17,964 7,297 554 351 176 158 6 78 0 27,791
90602 12,788 7,500 88 147 30 41 0 18 82 21,357
90603 14,035 1,871 33 35 95 116 35 14 0 16,847
90604 24,449 7,344 159 188 121 101 90 61 53 33,488
90605 17,693 11,463 71 207 30 100 74 109 89 30,859
90606 12,639 13,722 36 128 8 10 25 22 0 27,353
90638 27,911 5,790 383 526 673 231 137 191 30 37,680
90640 16,788 27,325 2,590 666 846 1,175 307 113 0 54,121
90650 45,391 30,084 861 2,656 2,258 183 1,161 692 317 85,961
90660 19,336 32,508 267 444 94 139 52 37 21 53,762
90670 6,470 5,981 118 173 64 24 80 5 27 13,213
90701 33,471 7,973 4,784 4,887 5,199 801 531 2,339 185 64,723
90704 2,290 823 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 3,179
90706 40,059 9,189 332 1,350 1,711 202 310 313 195 55,954
90710 13,440 5,873 386 625 557 277 54 186 0 22,379
90712 22,622 2,118 172 417 140 42 184 62 108 26,962
90713 21,889 1,384 292 222 45 69 70 12 54 24,804
90715 10,883 2,623 384 935 557 15 110 129 292 16,345
90716 4,166 7,178 52 223 626 20 11 74 74 12,548
90717 13,572 2,460 272 91 270 209 97 284 0 17,958
90723 16,803 21,727 216 654 284 57 114 194 356 41,394
90731 31,201 15,709 321 708 182 256 13 31 160 53,278
90732 19,516 1,754 180 167 351 277 0 36 0 24,863
90744 12,501 29,350 159 820 47 83 101 44 29 43,821
90745 21,567 11,783 365 7,908 984 268 327 160 76 46,199
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.51 LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ZIP CODE, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 5 and Over
English
Total
Zip Code Only Spanish Chinese Taglog Korean Japanese Vietnamese Indic Cambodian Age 5+
90746 19,940 2,958 88 688 14 94 19 77 0 24,544
90802 20,855 7,975 251 484 24 114 212 18 256 31,513
90803 28,112 1,258 110 140 113 96 126 13 0 31,322
90804 20,219 6,440 274 170 102 184 277 49 3,065 32,604
90805 44,476 12,903 654 2,766 445 68 1,216 109 1,317 66,303
90806 22,425 10,546 392 2,260 117 259 603 28 2,387 40,463
90807 22,212 1,432 105 735 39 125 153 91 68 25,912
90808 31,484 1,985 100 278 69 89 130 61 65 35,438
90810 16,279 8,870 145 5,154 34 372 366 48 391 32,736
90813 15,546 23,470 445 717 51 0 1,349 5 6,876 50,428
90814 14,190 1,197 95 78 17 44 32 19 50 16,554
90815 31,414 1,915 641 305 227 186 87 75 39 36,413
90822 6,253 384 29 336 8 70 0 0 0 7,419
91001 27,107 4,290 183 113 0 240 43 17 0 33,308
91006 19,522 2,147 3,487 205 755 459 68 230 0 28,641
91007 16,780 1,550 3,700 118 734 579 47 119 0 24,804
91010 13,929 6,860 368 1,029 132 35 113 263 0 23,936
91011 15,088 648 329 30 1,055 170 2 99 0 18,593
91016 25,532 7,752 277 250 155 96 52 85 0 35,777
91020 4,705 631 30 55 27 14 0 24 0 6,168
91024 8,765 418 57 73 0 68 6 0 0 9,837
91030 15,448 2,229 2,585 109 277 427 76 159 6 22,692
91040 13,563 1,738 22 194 104 44 0 112 0 16,915
91042 16,590 3,057 118 372 166 89 74 16 0 22,609
91101 10,015 3,138 513 137 71 89 108 91 0 15,197
91103 14,469 8,202 192 207 33 244 40 28 0 23,931
91104 20,065 9,077 337 760 68 112 100 0 0 34,753
91105 8,499 1,027 199 126 17 121 0 16 0 10,548
91106 14,890 3,855 922 323 96 388 153 112 0 22,471
91107 18,913 4,689 1,432 588 11 314 153 153 0 29,225
91108 8,200 428 2,833 45 74 240 0 104 0 12,471
91201 9,359 4,811 56 407 944 14 132 146 0 20,741
91202 10,948 1,265 344 405 1,327 189 68 109 0 19,341
91203 4,214 2,593 6 596 495 65 57 43 0 11,874
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.51 LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ZIP CODE, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 5 and Over
English
Total
Zip Code Only Spanish Chinese Taglog Korean Japanese Vietnamese Indic Cambodian Age 5+
91204 3,753 5,837 156 1,095 558 27 67 18 51 14,189
91205 9,480 9,033 229 2,167 1,512 109 501 141 0 35,574
91206 15,075 3,260 502 1,315 2,019 216 114 27 0 28,979
91207 5,066 726 138 85 181 10 17 35 0 8,564
91208 9,643 753 231 256 650 42 6 0 0 13,821
91214 18,876 1,461 218 205 1,341 34 54 54 0 25,292
91301 21,181 1,105 257 131 213 42 52 151 0 24,858
91302 10,338 687 68 8 394 60 5 35 0 12,218
91303 8,164 7,323 228 384 90 31 299 238 0 17,790
91304 26,556 7,463 726 633 509 76 314 719 97 40,030
91306 23,120 6,903 808 813 659 153 935 418 0 36,415
91307 15,740 1,000 196 298 147 105 53 173 0 19,550
91311 25,983 2,873 666 450 1,073 180 245 445 7 34,885
91316 16,286 1,856 131 72 148 65 64 99 0 23,214
91321 16,884 4,002 78 151 81 42 38 85 0 22,176
91324 13,000 5,071 511 388 478 93 299 255 0 21,792
91325 18,784 3,384 432 324 341 277 35 242 0 26,148
91326 15,281 1,249 504 279 1,628 150 59 383 0 22,381
91330 1,292 213 14 19 8 22 15 0 0 1,690
91331 22,074 51,851 218 1,462 366 236 218 345 33 78,819
91335 32,968 12,586 592 995 804 228 969 535 38 57,332
91340 7,844 21,515 7 120 4 44 0 36 0 29,711
91342 35,209 24,072 157 788 87 181 136 300 0 62,887
91343 23,825 13,754 515 864 1,040 285 376 284 0 44,382
91344 30,675 3,434 467 459 2,099 240 176 592 0 42,829
91345 8,316 3,866 108 377 42 90 122 64 0 13,648
91350 24,443 2,058 102 453 47 121 19 145 10 28,295
91351 36,007 3,671 44 418 26 185 31 103 0 42,115
91352 15,373 19,446 86 1,466 187 280 50 159 0 39,453
91354 5,807 550 100 111 7 8 22 6 0 7,030
91355 19,330 912 157 163 146 17 0 98 0 21,641
91356 16,482 2,018 140 29 169 57 6 185 0 23,806
91364 19,203 1,055 231 106 318 144 0 108 0 24,070
91367 25,315 1,780 375 106 371 96 134 243 0 32,662
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.51 LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ZIP CODE, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 5 and Over
English
Total
Zip Code Only Spanish Chinese Taglog Korean Japanese Vietnamese Indic Cambodian Age 5+
91381 1,173 136 22 25 0 0 0 0 0 1,557
91384 10,711 6,818 60 110 23 18 0 25 0 18,177
91401 18,745 9,647 155 247 442 103 99 139 0 33,449
91402 19,315 19,721 361 2,568 755 231 304 416 0 47,107
91403 14,815 1,085 113 50 37 53 17 76 0 19,022
91405 16,638 12,903 355 797 684 77 456 247 319 36,079
91406 23,791 12,968 238 581 571 127 265 232 10 42,220
91411 10,096 7,390 33 292 121 77 57 80 0 19,820
91423 20,922 1,783 188 7 70 81 0 69 0 26,580
91436 9,830 828 58 33 104 23 0 60 0 13,029
91501 10,074 1,834 108 383 259 81 0 163 0 15,296
91502 4,019 3,442 0 172 149 24 81 79 0 8,842
91504 13,904 4,369 183 194 532 92 169 81 0 21,177
91505 19,446 3,892 102 316 176 79 129 26 0 26,120
91506 12,512 3,127 197 117 67 122 141 132 0 17,368
91601 15,861 12,098 169 361 188 126 162 101 0 31,282
91602 10,604 1,469 86 57 65 139 19 32 0 13,624
91604 19,006 1,056 149 66 151 98 6 17 0 23,232
91605 14,145 23,380 273 2,179 818 598 100 233 124 45,919
91606 15,408 14,402 138 763 201 121 354 135 0 36,130
91607 18,942 3,173 77 190 125 200 49 114 0 26,537
91702 24,366 19,151 290 1,207 208 220 136 44 0 47,387
91706 18,969 36,238 2,531 2,516 11 124 539 82 98 62,148
91711 26,720 2,032 814 92 371 179 142 269 0 32,279
91722 20,868 5,313 457 758 25 101 126 155 27 28,705
91723 11,256 1,852 161 164 71 47 26 186 0 14,200
91724 17,050 2,688 520 400 20 67 178 146 0 21,903
91731 6,104 14,710 1,540 234 124 24 526 26 88 23,654
91732 14,823 30,174 3,129 635 177 27 1,467 48 90 51,305
91733 8,221 27,416 1,867 84 30 110 718 76 204 39,096
91740 37,016 4,073 555 521 95 138 145 203 0 45,249
91744 25,030 39,144 845 2,623 246 128 415 287 3 69,704
91745 26,426 9,979 6,834 945 1,705 766 93 126 27 48,673
91746 8,186 17,124 284 540 86 27 649 38 45 27,406
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 1.51 LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME BY ZIP CODE, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons Age 5 and Over
English
Total
Zip Code Only Spanish Chinese Taglog Korean Japanese Vietnamese Indic Cambodian Age 5+
91748 19,350 7,462 3,766 2,202 1,840 459 186 626 38 37,300
91750 25,297 3,192 240 286 197 95 203 106 28 31,198
91754 15,734 12,963 19,896 607 1,068 2,875 2,480 121 415 58,334
91765 26,282 3,397 2,340 1,395 1,432 352 206 1,091 0 38,634
91766 21,145 25,602 897 878 284 169 430 112 799 51,774
91767 23,728 11,296 343 121 33 113 416 81 39 37,178
91768 13,762 12,128 192 365 65 25 462 60 65 27,786
91770 16,245 20,880 10,949 607 331 921 3,037 128 489 54,779
91773 23,820 3,071 614 341 268 135 90 156 49 30,191
91775 12,700 2,335 2,168 288 307 739 83 112 0 19,857
91776 11,764 9,339 7,099 576 468 158 1,293 48 76 32,212
91780 19,654 3,381 2,946 470 610 399 164 116 0 29,175
91789 21,138 5,144 3,810 3,164 1,993 342 630 845 16 38,894
91790 23,142 7,662 1,365 928 147 46 644 64 5 35,202
91791 16,289 4,334 1,246 632 197 168 89 157 4 24,176
91792 14,647 6,204 1,765 3,046 282 170 518 366 38 27,994
91801 17,636 11,405 12,581 732 592 505 1,575 239 77 47,412
91803 9,691 7,841 6,897 680 123 329 1,163 183 61 28,089
93510 5,104 283 8 0 0 0 0 30 0 5,557
93532 1,959 165 0 14 0 5 0 0 0 2,206
93534 25,863 2,700 114 236 90 38 0 33 0 29,942
93535 37,980 4,753 83 288 48 69 72 30 0 44,286
93536 31,465 3,614 164 249 142 46 32 50 30 36,723
93543 7,012 1,857 0 44 15 0 0 0 0 9,096
93544 1,053 227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,317
93550 48,652 10,127 123 708 54 153 106 206 53 62,178
93551 15,434 1,774 0 339 53 32 61 62 0 18,305
93553 990 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,078
93563 1,141 62 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1,253
Total 4,427,612 2,563,670 208,696 155,890 123,770 63,857 51,306 34,100 23,888 8,135,401
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

BUILDING STRONG COMMUNITIES

BUILDING STRONG COMMUNITIES: Key Findings
Strong communities rest on a foundation of family relationships, civic involvement and
personal investment in the community, good physical health, mental health and access to
health care, and adequate public safety and security.
Sense of Optimism
•=
•=
Latinos have a more optimistic outlook than other ethnic groups, as reported in
surveys such as the Public Policy Institute of California statewide survey. (Table
2.01)
In September 1999, 66% of Latinos said that they think things in California are going
in the right direction, compared to 60% for respondents in Los Angeles. This pattern
is typical of similar findings in other studies. (Table 2.01)
Percent
Latinos Are More Optimistic
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Going in
Right
Direction
Better Off
Financially
This Year
Better Off
Financially
Next Year
Latino
Non-Latino
Community Issues
•=
30% of Latinos statewide identified schools and education as the top public policy
concern in September 1999, similar to the rating of 29% by all Angelenos. Latinos
rated crime and gangs higher than did all Los Angeles residents, and were about the
same in concerns about immigration and illegal immigrants. (Table 2.01)
Political Empowerment
•=
More than half of Latino adults are not citizens and are therefore ineligible to vote.
Recent increases in Latino naturalization will gradually increase numbers of eligible
voters.
1

•= Latino voter registration increased 25% between 1994 and 1997 for a total of 176,767
new voters according to the Southwest Voter Registration Project.
25% Increase in Latino Registered Voters
1994-1997
1,000,000
900,000
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
1994 1997
•=
240 Latinos held elective offices in Los Angeles County, with 115 elected to city
offices, 9 in the State Assembly, 4 in the State Senate, 4 in the U.S. House of
Representatives, 78 on school boards and 30 in other elected positions including a
County Supervisor, the County Sheriff, judicial and other offices.
FAMILIES
•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
Latinos are most likely of all ethnic groups to live with family members: 84% of
Latino households in 1990 were family households, compared to 58% of White, 78%
of Asian and 66% of African American households.
70% of Latino children live in two parent families, 23% with a mother only, 4% with
a father only and 4% do not live with parents, according to 1998-99 Current
Population Survey data. 76% of White, 78% of Asian and 32% of African American
children in the county live in two-parent families.
Family support is also seen in where cultural preference, family emergencies or
financial difficulty result in extended family living arrangements. In 1990 13% of
Latino children lived in the home of a grandparent or other relative, compared to rates
of 6% for Whites, 8% for Asians and 19% for African Americans.
There is a strong preference in Latino families for the elderly to remain at home rather
than in a retirement residence or nursing home. This is born out by 1990 census data
which show 95% of Latinos age 75 and over living in households, compared to 88%
for Whites, 95% for Asians and 93% for African Americans.
An important aspect of family life, strongly affecting transmission of cultural values
and practices, is marriage patterns. In California Latinos have had historically had a
2

high rate of intermarriage with other ethnic groups. In her chapter in Ethnic Los
Angeles, (Waldinger and Bozorgmehr, 1996) Vilma Ortiz notes that during the
‘sixties, 40% of Mexican Americans married outside their group and the intermarriage
rate increased to about 50% by the mid-‘seventies. Subsequent heavy
immigration, with many new arrivals already married and the tendency of recent
migrants to marry within their group, resulted in a sharp decline in the intermarriage
rate. By 1990, 85% of Mexican-origin women in the Los Angeles area were married
to Mexican-origin men, with higher rates for foreign born and lower rates for U.S.
born, especially younger women. Ortiz notes that due to the very large pool of
potential marriage partners it is likely that intermarriage may slow in future years.
HEALTH
Health measures for Latinos -- especially immigrants -- show a paradoxical pattern of
good health at birth and low rates for the major causes of death in spite of having high
risk factors of poverty and low education. The most difficult issues for Latino health are
access to health care and availability of culturally competent health care providers.
Births and Deaths
•=
99,269 Latino births in 1997 were 61% of all births in the county. Latino births have
declined from a peak of 120,000 in 1991, similar to trends in total births. (Table
2.03)
Births
140,000
Latino and Non-Latino Birth Trends
120,000
100,000
80,000
Latino
Non-Latino
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
1970 1980 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
•=
Multiracial/ethnic births were 10% of all births in L.A. County in 1997. A report
from the Public Policy Institute of California shows that while multiracial/ethnic
births to U.S. born mothers in California increased from 14% in 1982 to 21% in
1997, births to immigrant mothers were primarily within the same ethnic group
and have remained at about 8% since 1982. Since more than half of births in L.A.
County are to foreign-born women, the rate of mixed births in this area has
3

emained lower than in other parts of the state with smaller immigrant
populations.
•= 53% of mixed births were to Hispanic/White couples in California in 1997, 7%
were Hispanic/Black and 6% were Hispanic/Asian.
•=
There were 14,645 births to Latinas age 15-19 in 1997, 77% of all teen births,
indicating an above average rate of teen mothers with special needs for
themselves and their children. (Table 2.03)
Latino Births to Teenagers, 1992-1997
Los Angeles County
Age 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Under 15 350 377 398 408 406 427 374 323
15-17 6,328 6,585 6,591 6,487 6,542 6,432 6,013 5,817
18-19 10,433 11,059 10,793 10,391 10,183 9,922 9,183 8,505
Total 17,111 18,021 17,782 17,286 17,131 16,781 15,570 14,645
•=
•=
Latinas had the county’s best rate of births at normal weight at 93.3% and the next
to lowest infant death rate at 5.3, compared to the rate of 6.6 for Whites. An
aspect of the Latino health paradox is that Latinas have lower rates of obtaining
early prenatal care with 80% seen in the first trimester compared to 90% for
Whites, yet they have consistently good birth outcomes. (Table 2.03)
Latino death rates are well below the county average for the leading causes of
death: heart disease, cancer, and stroke. (Table 2.05)
Low Latino Death Rates
250
200
150
100
50
Latino
Asian
Black
White
0
Heart Cancer Stroke
4

•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
Latinos show rates below the county average for years of potential life lost for
most causes of death. Years of Potential Life Lost is a measure of excess
mortality, or premature death. Conditions for which Latino rates are above
average are liver disease (Latino males have an elevated rate due to alcoholism),
diabetes and homicide. Homicide and accidents in particular cause high years of
potential life lost since the victims are usually young adults. (Table 2.06)
The pattern of teenage violent deaths for Latinos differs by cause:
(Table 2.07-2.09)
Homicide rate: 25.3 (African American 53.3, White 5.8, Asian 8.5)
Motor vehicle crash rate: 9.3 (African American 11.5, White 10.4, Asian 7.6)
Suicide rate: 2.4 (African American 2.9, White 4.0, Asian 2.9)
65% of youth homicides in 1996 were Latino youth and 25% were African
Americans, showing homicide levels in excess of their representation in the youth
population.
Latinos have rates for many major communicable diseases which are comparable
to the county average. Conditions for which Latino rates are considerably lower
than average are Gonorrhea and Salmonellosis, while Latino rates are
considerably above average for Chlamydia, Hepatitis A and Shigellosis.
(Table 2.15)
AIDS is of particular concern because rates for Latinos have been increasing as a
percentage of the county total. AIDS cases of 7,117 Latinos and 764 Latinas were
reported as of the end of 1998.
39% of new AIDS cases diagnosed in 1997 were Latinos. The Latino AIDS rate
in the county as of 1997 was 43 per 100,000 compared to 33 for Whites and 99 for
African Americans. However, the Latino rate rose from far below the county
average to nearly the same during the ‘ninties. (Table 2.17)
Health risk behavior reported by Latinos in the 1997 County Health Survey
included 5% or 130,000 with a pattern of heavy alcohol drinking, and 16%
reported using tobacco. (Table 2.18)
Health Insurance Coverage
•=
46% of Latino adults and 33% of children have no health insurance, limiting access to
preventive health care. (Table 2.13) Immigrants have a much lower rate of health
insurance than U.S. born Latinos, whose coverage is similar to other ethnic groups.
(Table 2.18)
5

Latino Health Insurance Coverage
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Uninsured
Insured
Children
Adults
•=
L.A. County Health Survey findings demonstrate the impact of lack of health
insurance for a large segment of the Latino population. Key findings for Latinos from
the 1997 survey, shown in Table 2.18, are summarized below: (Table 2.18)
•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
36% have no regular health care provider
12% rely on a County or community clinic as their regular source of care
(note: 12% the 1998 Latino population would be 496,000 persons)
39% use a private physician or HMO for regular care
47% have difficulty obtaining needed medical care
11% of children under 6 have not been to a doctor in the past year
•=
60% of Latinos reported in a statewide survey in 1998 that they were not familiar with
Healthy Families, an important new state health initiative to provide health care for
children in low-income families. While the program was still quite new at that time,
it illustrates the difference in public knowledge about programs: at the time the
survey was taken only 15% of Latinos reported that they were not familiar with Medi-
Cal and about 20% were not familiar with Medicare.
Latinos not familiar with Government health
programs
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Medi-Cal Medicare Healthy Families
6

Latino Physician Shortage
•= The severe shortage of Latino physicians is a barrier to effective health care in terms
of language and understanding of cultural health beliefs and practices. At the current
Latino population level California should have at least 30,000 Latino physicians, but
only 3,000 Latinos are licensed to practice medicine in the state. This means a
shortage of 27,000 doctors, not including other health providers such as nurses and
physical therapists. (Table 2.10)
•= A major increase in Latino students preparing for careers in science and medicine, as
well as programs to assist with college costs for extended studies, will be needed to
approach a solution to this shortage.
Child Nutrition
•= Latino children examined in the Child Health and Disability Prevention Program for
young low-income children showed the effects of good basic nutrition in low rates of
children who were underweight or small for their age. While the rate was not above
average, 13% of Latino children tested showed indications of anemia. Latino children
had the highest rates of obesity, a significant problem in view of the higher
occurrence of diabetes among Latinos. (Table 2.11)
Immunization
•=
On-time immunization rates for Latino infants and toddlers show a strong increase, up
from 24% in 1990 to 56% in 1999. (Table 2.12)
Latino Preschoolers Fully Immunized
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
7

Mental Health Care
•=
Latinos are 19% of clients served by the County Mental Health Department, far short
of their representation in the population and therefore among those in need of mental
health treatment. One reason for the gap in services may be the low proportion of
clients whose primary language is Spanish (7%), suggesting that language access as
well as cultural barriers may be responsible. (Table 2.14)
CRIME
•=
•=
•=
•=
Table 2.19 shows data on arrests of adults and juveniles in Los Angeles County by
race/ethnic group.
A total of 56,597 Latino adults and 36,196 juveniles were arrested in 1998 for felony
offenses. The Latino adult felony arrest rate was 2,201 per 100,000 population,
somewhat higher than the allover rate of 2,062. For Latino juveniles the felony arrest
rate was 1,989 compared to the rate of 1,993 for all arrestees. Latinos were 38% of
adults arrested for felonies and 56% of juveniles. (Table 2.19)
112,868 Latino adults and 15,330 juveniles were arrested for misdemeanor offenses.
48% of adults and 53% of juvenile misdemeanor arrests were Latinos. (Table 2.19)
The five most frequent arrests for adults and juveniles were:
Adults
Juveniles
26,051 Driving under the influence 3,337 Petty theft
15,453 Felony assault 2,493 Burglary
11,675 Felony narcotics 2,124 Marijuana possession
7,562 Drunk 2,065 Vandalism
6,912 Petty theft 1,659 Felony assault
In addition, 8,835 juveniles were arrested for curfew violations.
•=
•=
About half of L.A. County youths under the supervision of the California Youth
Authority in 1999 were Latinos. These included 311 of 601 first commitments, 783
of 1,403 parolees, and 1,047 of 2,046 who were incarcerated in CYA facilities.
(Table 2.20)
Note: Crime was not a major focus for this study, so the crime data described here is
quite limited. Data on conviction, sentencing, probation and parole as well as
victimization and characteristics of the criminal justice system would be needed to
obtain a basic picture of the impact of crime on Latinos.
8

Table 2.01 PUBLIC OPINION POLL DATA ON COMMUNITY ISSUES
Los Angeles and California, September 1999
General Population Latinos
Topic/Rating Los Angeles California
Optimism: Things are going in the right direction in California 60% 66%
Issues: Most important public policy issue facing California today
Schools, education 29% 30%
Crime, gangs 11% 13%
Immigration, illegal immigration 8% 7%
Guns, gun control 6% 2%
Jobs, the economy 4% 3%
Poverty, homeless, welfare 2% 3%
Health care, HMO reform 5% 4%
Follow what's going on in government and public affairs
Most of the time 28% 18%
Some of the time 41% 45%
Only now and then 23% 26%
Hardly ever 6% 8%
Sources of political information
Television 47% 63%
Newspapers 29% 19%
Radio 8% 5%
Talking to people 6% 8%
Internet 5% 3%
Magazines 3% 1%
Source: Public Policy Institute of California, PPIC Statewide Survey, September 1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.02 BIRTHS BY CHILD'S RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1970-1997
Live Births/Birth Rate
Child's Race 1970 Rate* 1980 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Rate 1997 Rate
Latino 33,761 26.2 59,197 116,783 120,262 116,044 115,692 110,793 108,775 104,138 25.6 101,144 24.0
African American 19,229 25.2 18,613 24,518 23,659 19,802 21,503 20,129 18,760 15,632 17.2 17,051 18.9
Asian Pacific 2,186 12.3 7,561 17,900 17,747 16,708 17,973 17,810 16,668 15,370 13.3 16,140 13.1
White 74,022 15.7 42,302 42,971 39,309 43,365 33,351 30,349 28,552 32,151 9.8 25,489 7.9
Other/Unknown 3,214 ** 3,438 1,952 1,760 0 1,187 232 2,126 1,682 ** 2,212 4.7
Total 132,412 18.8 131,111 204,124 202,737 195,919 189,706 179,313 174,881 168,973 17.9 162,036 16.8
*Crude birth rate per 1,000 population using DHS data as denominator.
**Not Available
Sources: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Data Collection and Analysis.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.03 BIRTH CHARACTERISTICS BY MOTHER'S RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1997
Race/Ethnic Group
African Asian Other/
Total % American % Pacific % White % Unknown % Latino %
Birth Rate* 16.8 18.9 13.1 7.9 4.7 24.0
Age of Mother
Under 15 406 0.2 58 0.4 8 1.0 17 0.1 323 0.3
15 - 17 7,745 4.6 826 5.7 153 1.9 420 1.3 5,817 5.6
18 - 19 12,223 7.2 1,462 10.1 286 11.2 1,000 3.1 8,505 8.2
20 - 24 41,083 24.3 3,732 25.7 1,723 30.0 4,028 12.5 29,335 28.2
25 -29 45,954 27.2 3,563 24.5 4,617 34.4 7,777 24.2 27,558 26.5
30-34 37,947 22.5 3,047 21.0 5,291 34.4 9,890 30.8 18,490 17.8
35+ 19,179 11.4 1,837 12.6 3,476 22.6 7,938 24.7 10,169 9.8
Total 168,973 97.4 14,525 100.0 15,370 135.6 32,151 96.6 104,138 96.2
Prenatal Care .
First Trimester 133,701 82.5 11,903 79.8 13,072 87.1 28,087 90.3 79,172 79.8
Second Trimester 21,500 13.3 2,295 15.4 1,500 10.0 2,286 7.4 15,191 15.3
Third Trimester 3,600 2.2 355 2.4 270 1.8 352 1.1 2,584 2.6
None 1,190 0.7 202 1.4 66 0.4 171 0.6 735 0.7
Unknown 2,045 1.3 155 1.0 93 0.6 196 0.6 1,555 1.6
Total 162,036 100.0 14,910 100.0 15,001 100.0 31,092 100.0 99,237 100.0
Birthweight
Normal (2500 gr. +) 149,637 12,662 84.9 13,845 92.9 28,889 93.0 1,626 89.5 92,615 93.3
Low (1500 to 2499 gr.) 10,487 1,841 12.3 998 6.7 1,879 6.0 166 9.1 5,603 5.6
Very low (under 1500 gr.) 1,912 407 2.7 158 1.1 304 1.0 24 1.3 1,019 1.0
Total 162,036 14,910 100.0 15,001 100.0 31,072 100.0 1,816 100.0 99,237 100.0
Infant Deaths
Number 946 189 55 169 1 532
Rate by child's race* 5.9 11.1 3.4 6.6 4.3 5.3
*Crude rate per 1000 live births.
Source: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Data Collection and Analysis.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.04 BIRTH CHARACTERISTICS BY ZIP CODES
Los Angeles County, 1996
Age of Mother Normal Infant Deaths Race of Child
Birthweight African Asian
Zip Code* Community Total

Table 2.04 BIRTH CHARACTERISTICS BY ZIP CODES
Los Angeles County, 1996
Age of Mother Normal Infant Deaths Race of Child
Birthweight African Asian
Zip Code* Community Total

Table 2.04 BIRTH CHARACTERISTICS BY ZIP CODES
Los Angeles County, 1996
Age of Mother Normal Infant Deaths Race of Child
Birthweight African Asian
Zip Code* Community Total

Table 2.04 BIRTH CHARACTERISTICS BY ZIP CODES
Los Angeles County, 1996
Age of Mother Normal Infant Deaths Race of Child
Birthweight African Asian
Zip Code* Community Total

Table 2.04 BIRTH CHARACTERISTICS BY ZIP CODES
Los Angeles County, 1996
Age of Mother Normal Infant Deaths Race of Child
Birthweight African Asian
Zip Code* Community Total

Table 2.04 BIRTH CHARACTERISTICS BY ZIP CODES
Los Angeles County, 1996
Age of Mother Normal Infant Deaths Race of Child
Birthweight African Asian
Zip Code* Community Total

Table 2.04 BIRTH CHARACTERISTICS BY ZIP CODES
Los Angeles County, 1996
Age of Mother Normal Infant Deaths Race of Child
Birthweight African Asian
Zip Code* Community Total

Table 2.04 BIRTH CHARACTERISTICS BY ZIP CODES
Los Angeles County, 1996
Age of Mother Normal Infant Deaths Race of Child
Birthweight African Asian
Zip Code* Community Total

Table 2.04 BIRTH CHARACTERISTICS BY ZIP CODES
Los Angeles County, 1996
Age of Mother Normal Infant Deaths Race of Child
Birthweight African Asian
Zip Code* Community Total

Table 2.04 BIRTH CHARACTERISTICS BY ZIP CODES
Los Angeles County, 1996
Age of Mother Normal Infant Deaths Race of Child
Birthweight African Asian
Zip Code* Community Total

Table 2.05 LEADING CAUSES OF DEATH BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990-1997
Persons
Cause of Death Total African American Asian/Other White Latino
Year Number Rate Number Rate Number Rate Number Rate Number Rate
Heart Disease 1990 21,670 158.0 2,967 253.0 852 77.6 15490 167.3 2,289 106.2
1997 20,203 116.2 2,690 213.1 1,185 57.9 13,186 128.3 2,689 73.8
Cancer 1990 13,395 122.9 1,813 171.5 792 78.9 9,175 137.3 1,593 78.2
1997 13,504 104.3 1,928 175.1 1,105 65.5 8,314 119.1 2,110 63.8
Cerebro-Vascular 1990 4,299 29.2 601 49.6 260 23.8 2,957 27.8 472 21.8
1997 4,166 23.4 564 43.8 401 20.0 2,570 21.7 621 17.4
Lung Disease 1990 2,357 18.2 250 22.2 93 8.4 1,852 22.0 159 7.0
1997 2,863 17.6 304 25.0 194 9.2 2,108 23.0 250 6.4
Pneumonia/Influenza 1990 2,796 17.0 244 19.1 132 10.4 2,107 18.4 309 13.3
1997 3,346 15.7 328 21.1 241 10.3 2,295 16.8 467 11.5
Diabetes 1990 1,053 9.1 207 19.2 69 6.5 522 7.0 253 12.8
1997 1,746 13.1 311 27.2 155 8.7 744 9.8 524 16.4
Liver Disease 1990 1,321 14.5 171 17.7 41 4.3 700 14.0 401 18.8
1997 1,041 9.7 88 8.9 42 2.7 477 9.4 422 12.8
Accidents 1990 2,773 29.2 386 37.7 170 17.2 1,218 28.9 983 30.7
1997 2,030 19.5 256 27.0 158 11.4 913 21.9 686 16.9
Suicide 1990 955 10.1 66 6.6 56 5.8 662 15.0 168 5.6
1997 776 7.7 59 6.4 73 5.4 473 11.5 165 4.1
Homicide 1990 1,890 21.2 652 65.1 59 6.1 309 8.6 865 24.0
1997 1,247 14.9 350 48.1 47 4.1 173 5.8 625 15.3
AIDS 1990 1,950 21.2 319 30.8 25 2.4 1,208 29.1 391 13.2
1997 680 188 19.2 12 0.8 262 6.7 216 5.1
All Other Causes 1990 8,241 70.9 1,302 116.0 396 39.0 4,745 70.9 1,772 58.4
1997 8,819 1,271 112.2 538 31.7 5,045 64.1 1,925 46.9
Total 1990 62,700 521.4 8,978 808.6 2,945 280.4 40,945 546.4 9,655 390.0
1997 60,070 8,377 727.2 4,151 227.7 36,560 438.2 10,700 290.4
Age-adjusted rate per 100,000 population, calculated on base of 1990 census and 1997 population estimate by race/ethnic group
Source: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Data Collection and Analysis
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.06 YEARS OF POTENTIAL LIFE LOST BY CAUSE OF DEATH AND RACE/ETHNIC GROUPS
Los Angeles County, 1997
Years of Potential Life Lost/Rate*
Total African American Asian White Latino
Cause of Death Years Rate Years Rate Years Rate Years Rate Years Rate
Heart Disease 160,346 14.9 31,582 32.5 6,235 4.0 84,127 16.3 32,237 10.7
Stroke 29,207 2.6 6,152 6.2 2,332 1.5 12,300 2.2 7,197 2.3
Cancer 188,335 18.4 30,742 32.1 12,385 8.6 98,070 21.1 40,965 13.1
Lung Disease 24,020 2.2 4,067 4.2 1,195 0.8 15,920 3.0 2,317 0.8
Pneumonia/Influenza 16,655 1.4 2,285 2.2 977 0.6 8,890 1.4 3,787 1.2
Liver Disease 19,337 1.9 1,755 1.9 707 0.5 8,020 1.8 8,120 2.6
Diabetes 25,572 2.5 5,620 5.9 1,150 0.7 9,415 1.9 8,635 3.1
Accidents 66,052 7.0 10,812 11.9 2,917 2.4 24,247 7.8 25,770 6.4
Suicide 23,810 2.6 1,955 2.2 2,060 1.6 12,527 3.8 6,597 1.8
Homicide 61,180 7.6 18,950 23.9 1,400 1.2 7,402 2.8 31,792 8.4
AIDS 22,887 2.2 5,717 5.8 272 0.2 8,192 2.2 8,100 1.9
Other Causes 182,975 17.9 34,445 37.9 7,820 6.7 60,270 17.6 72,805 15.8
All Causes 820,377 81.2 154,085 166.5 39,452 29.0 349,382 82.0 248,325 68.2
*Years of potential life lost calculated to age 85. Age-adjusted rate of YPLL-85 per 1,000 population.
Source: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Data Collection and Analysis.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.07 HOMICIDE DEATHS, AGE 0-19 BY RACE/ETHNICITY AND GENDER
Los Angeles County, 1990-1994
Children 0-19 Years
Race Gender Deaths Rate*
Firearm
Deaths
Homicides
Rate*
Latino
African American
Asian/Other
White
Total
Males 1,185 43.6 1,064 39.7
Females 148 5.1 102 3.9
Both 1,333 25.3 1,166 22.7
Males 515 89.5 468 83.7
Females 102 16.0 67 11.5
Both 617 53.3 535 48.1
Males 92 13.9 74 11.6
Females 17 2.6 10 1.7
Both 109 8.5 84 6.9
Males 119 8.0 84 6.0
Females 56 3.5 30 2.2
Both 175 5.8 114 4.2
Males 1,911 35.6 1,690 32.2
Females 323 5.6 209 4.1
Both 2,234 21.2 1,899 18.7
*Age-adjusted rate per 100,000.
Source: Pediatric Injury Mortality Report, 1990-1994.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.08 MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH DEATHS, AGE 0-19
Average Annual Mortality Rates by Race/Ethnicity and Gender
Los Angeles County, 1990-1994
Children 0-19 years
Total Driver Passenger Pedestrian
Race/Gender Deaths Rate* Deaths Rate* Deaths Rate* Deaths Rate*
Latino
Males 379 12.5 107 4.1 120 4.0 117 3.2
Females 185 5.8 9 0.4 93 3.1 77 2.0
Both 564 9.3 116 2.3 213 3.6 194 2.6
African American
Males 107 15.6 17 3.1 42 6.1 35 4.5
Females 51 7.3 7 1.3 22 3.2 19 2.4
Both 158 11.5 24 2.2 64 4.7 54 3.5
Asian/Other
Males 69 10.2 19 3.0 23 3.5 17 2.1
Females 30 4.9 4 0.7 20 3.3 3 0.4
Both 99 7.6 23 1.9 43 3.4 20 1.3
White
Males 204 13.8 72 5.4 58 3.8 47 2.8
Females 99 6.7 20 4.6 49 3.4 20 1.1
Both 303 10.4 92 3.5 107 3.6 67 2.0
Total
Males 759 12.9 215 4.2 243 4.1 216 12.9
Females 365 6.1 40 0.8 184 3.0 119 6.1
Both 1,124 9.6 255 2.6 427 3.7 335 9.6
*Age-adjusted rate per 100,000.
Source: Pediatric Injury Mortality Report, 1990-1994.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.09 SUICIDE DEATHS, AGE 0-19
Mortality Rates by Race/Ethnicity and Gender
Los Angeles County, 1990-1994
Persons 0-19 Years
Race/Gender Deaths Rate
Latino
Males 91 3.4
Females 29 1.2
Both 120 2.4
African American
Males 28 4.9
Females 5 0.9
Both 33 2.9
Asian/Other
Males 27 4.3
Females 8 1.4
Both 35 2.9
White
Males 83 6.1
Females 23 1.8
Both 106 4.0
Total
Males 229 4.4
Females 65 1.3
Both 294 2.9
*Age-adjusted rate, per 100,000.
Source: Pediatric Injury Mortality Report, 1990-1994.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.10 PHYSICIAN TO POPULATION RATIO, LATINO AND NON-LATINO
California, 1999
Total Non-Latino % Latino %
Physicians 74,345 70,767 95.2 3,578 4.8
Population 34,210,500 23,810,500 69.6 10,400,000 30.4
Physician - Population ratio 335:1 2893:1
Parity level at 335:1 ratio 70,767 30,887
Parity gap or shortage -27,309
Source: David E. Hayes-Bautista, Center for the Study of Latino Health, UCLA School of Medicine, "The Latino Physician
Shortage in California 1999," 1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.11 CHILD NUTRITION INDICATORS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1997
Child Health & Disability Prevention Exams - Low Income Children
Percent of Children Tested
Indicator/Health Department Total* White Black Asian Hispanic
Short Stature: Low height for age under 5th percentile
LA Co. East 6.0 7.0 8.3 6.4 5.8
LA Co. West 6.3 5.9 7.5 6.6 5.9
LA Co. North 5.7 5.1 6.5 5.1 5.7
LA Co. South 6.5 7.8 7.9 4.7 6.4
LA Co. Unspecified 5.7 7.1 5.8 8.0 5.5
Pasadena HD 5.2 5.7 6.4 7.6 4.7
Long Beach HD 5.8 6.5 5.9 8.9 5.2
Average 5.9 6.4 6.9 6.8 5.6
Underweight: Low weight for height under 5th percentile
L.A. Co. East 2.0 2.3 3.5 3.3 1.9
L.A. Co. West 2.4 3.2 3.2 3.0 2.1
L.A. Co. North 2.1 4.2 2.7 3.1 1.8
L.A. Co. South 2.2 3.1 4.0 2.1 2.0
L.A. Co. Unspecified 2.1 2.6 2.9 3.2 1.8
Pasadena HD 3.1 3.1 3.6 5.9 5.9
Long Beach HD 2.4 2.6 3.0 4.0 4.0
Average 2.3 3.0 3.3 3.5 2.8
Overweight: High weight for height over 95th percentile
LA Co. East 14.6 11.8 10.6 10.6 15.2
LA Co. West 14.4 12.3 11.6 12.0 15.6
LA Co. North 14.3 10.9 11.7 9.4 15.4
LA Co. South 16.1 10.1 10.8 11.0 16.7
LA Co. Unspecified 14.6 11.9 11.0 13.7 16.0
Pasadena HD 10.9 12.8 7.8 8.6 8.6
Long Beach HD 12.6 11.4 10.9 13.2 13.2
Average 13.9 11.6 10.6 11.2 14.4
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.11 CHILD NUTRITION INDICATORS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1997
Child Health & Disability Prevention Exams - Low Income Children
Percent of Children Tested
Indicator/Health Department Total White Black Asian Hispanic
Anemic: Blood test indicates low iron-under 5th percentile
LA Co. East 14.3 13.6 20.6 13.7 14.2
LA Co. West 14.6 11.3 16.6 15.3 14.3
LA Co. North 11.2 10.1 24.1 11.1 10.9
LA Co. South 13.6 13.9 20.0 14.0 13.3
LA Co. Unspecified 17.2 15.6 26.5 19.0 15.2
Pasadena HD 8.4 7.3 11.9 9.2 9.2
Long Beach HD 14.5 11.2 19.7 14.4 14.4
Average 13.4 11.9 19.9 13.8 13.1
*Includes other and unspecified ethnicity
**LA County Health Department areas with zip code unspecified
Source: California Department of Health Services, Children's Medical Services Branch.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.12 PRESCHOOL CHILDREN FULLY IMMUNIZED
Los Angeles County, 1995-99
Percent Fully Immunized at 24 Months
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
Latino 24.4 32.2 33.3 34.0 56.6 49.2 51.5 53.7 58.8 60.4
African American 55.6 23.8 41.3 33.0 51.0 37.1 38.0 44.8 48.2 55.1
Asian Pacific 50.0 n.a. 53.3 n.a. 77.8 47.0 70.2 66.5 72.5 70.9
White 45.7 67.7 59.1 48.0 66.2 72.1 68.0 65.2 68 68.3
Other 16.7 50.0 50.0 n.a. 65.1 50.0 54.5 70.5 64.6 72.2
Unknown 47.4 45.2 57.1 n.a. n.a. 50.0 66.7 69.4 48.2 58.8
Total 37.2 42.6 59.9 40.0 59.9 52.1 55.0 56.2 62.9 59.8
Source: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Immunization Program.
Data from annual Kindergarten Retrospective Survey.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.13 PERSONS WITH NO HEALTH CARE INSURANCE
Los Angeles County, 1985-1997
Persons Age 0-64*
Percent of
Total Uninsured Uninsured Population
1985 2,211,500 27%
1989 2,718,300 31%
1992 2,852,000 31%
1994 2,656,000 29%
1997 2,670,000 32%
Age Groups - 1994
0-17 696,000 26.1%
18-64 1,974,000 73.9%
Total 2,670,000 100.0%
Uninsured
Uninsured
Race/Ethnic Groups 1997 Children Adults
Latino 33% 46%
African American 14% 26%
White 18% 24%
Asian 20% 35%
Other 13% 33%
Total 25% 37%
*Includes only persons under age 65, since virtually all older persons are insured by Medicare.
Source: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, 1985-1994
Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, LA County Health
Survey, 1997.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.14 MENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT CLIENTS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP AND PRIMARY LANGUAGE
Los Angeles County, 1997-98
Fee for Service Clients Short-Doyle/Medical Clients All Clients
Race/Ethnic Group Child/Youth Adult Older Adult Child/Youth Adult Older Adult Number Percent
Latino 1,487 2,516 275 10,110 15,344 1,387 31,119 19.2
African American 1,602 4,103 370 7,607 16,412 1,090 31,184 19.3
American Indian 21 57 7 110 366 16 577 0.4
Asian 69 699 67 732 2,857 322 4,746 2.9
White 7,626 12,081 2,237 5,772 20,931 2,455 51,102 31.6
Other 16 99 9 177 463 59 823 0.5
Unknown 21,508 12,459 1,589 1,629 4,557 371 42,113 26.0
Total 32,329 32,014 4,554 26,137 60,930 5,700 161,664 100.0
Primary Language Clients Percent
Spanish 10,479 7.0
English 77,170 51.5
African languages 17 0.0
Asian languages 3,892 2.6
European languages 1,118 0.7
Other languages 39,965 26.7
Sign languages 190 0.1
Unknown 16,956 11.3
Total 149,787 100.0
Source: Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health Planning Division.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.15 CASES OF SELECTED* NOTIFIABLE DISEASES BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1997
Cases
Total African American Asian White Latino
Disease Number Rate Number Rate Number Rate Number Rate Number Rate
AIDS 1,560 17.24 399 48.40 41 3.56 463 15.49 651 16.12
Campylobacteriosis 1,523 16.83 54 6.55 125 10.84 632 21.14 688 17.03
Chlamydia 23,021 254.30 3,717 808.60 378 58.80 1,248 74.90 7,459 331.10
Giardiasis 770 8.51 38 4.61 43 3.73 289 9.67 388 9.60
Gonorrhea 5,825 64.40 2,529 11.04 48 6.10 509 25.10 863 31.50
Hepatitis A 1,480 16.40 91 452.50 43 3.73 436 14.58 855 21.17
Salmonellosis 1,675 48.10 199 24.14 203 17.61 582 19.47 655 16.21
Shigellosis 848 9.37 44 5.34 28 2.43 170 5.69 586 14.51
Syphilis (early latent) 648 7.20 258 37.40 4 0.40 38 1.50 243 7.20
Tuberculosis 1,347 14.88 187 22.68 429 37.21 132 4.42 597 14.78
*Notifiable diseases with 500 or more cases reported. Total includes Other and Unknown ethnicity. Rate per 100,000.
Source: Department of Health Services, Data Collection and Analysis.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.16 TUBERCULOSIS CASES BY AGE GROUP AND RACE
Los Angeles County, 1986-1997
Total *Cases by Age Group African Asian/
Year Cases Rate 0-4 5-14 15-64 65+ American Other White Hispanic
1986 1,362 17.9 48 37 1,025 236 195 340 171 606
1987 1,302 16.9 43 54 1,001 223 229 327 239 563
1988 1,190 15.2 43 34 901 215 225 290 171 501
1989 1,681 21.2 78 53 1,253 300 267 460 239 712
1990 1,936 24.1 97 74 1,448 316 325 523 227 859
1991 2,121 26 123 78 1,606 314 385 494 237 1,004
1992 2,198 25.6 118 79 1,675 326 283 555 266 991
1993 1,940 22.1 92 74 1,465 309 374 439 220 906
1994 1,794 20.7 75 57 1,348 314 333 488 184 786
1995 1,622 18.5 80 34 1,196 312 272 453 195 701
1996 1,375 15.5 51 42 975 307 227 380 148 619
1997 Los Angeles 1,347 14.9 50 37 964 296 187 431 132 597
California 4,059 11.8
United States 19,855 7.4
*Includes cases with age unknown.
Source: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, Tuberculosis Control.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.17 AIDS CASES REPORTED BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP AND GENDER
Los Angeles County, 1991-1998
Adult/Adolescent Cases
Year Total* Rate
African
American Rate White Rate Other Rate Latino Rate
MALE
1991** 3,797 106 644 189 2,123 139 63 17 946 72
1992 3,904 108 755 223 1,980 132 110 28 1,050 77
1993 3,634 100 701 207 1,776 120 74 18 1,071 76
1994 3,355 91 695 205 1,576 108 88 21 981 67
1995 3,054 82 575 170 1,412 98 77 18 979 65
1996 2,383 63 486 142 1,048 73 62 14 785 51
1997 1,751 46 417 121 598 42 51 12 684 43
1998*** 1,479 39 343 99 475 33 38 9 621 39
FEMALE
1991** 208 6 66 17 65 4 10 2 67 5
1992 264 7 98 25 78 5 6 1 82 6
1993 300 8 105 27 78 5 2 0 114 9
1994 292 8 139 36 50 3 7 2 96 7
1995 335 9 125 33 73 5 10 2 126 9
1996 274 7 97 25 55 4 7 2 114 8
1997 255 7 116 30 46 3 8 2 85 6
1998*** 184 5 68 17 31 2 5 1 80 5
Rate per 100,000 population.
* Total includes cases with race/ethnicity is unknown.
**Includes cases diagnosed prior to 1991.
***Data are provisional due to reporting delay.
Source: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, HIV Epidemiology Program, Advanced HIV Disease (AIDS) Surveillance
Summary, September 30.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.18 LOS ANGELES HEALTH SURVEY FINDINGS
Estimated Persons Affected
Los Angeles County, 1997
Race/Ethnic Group
African American Asian White Latino
Health Risk Behavior Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Health Care Access
No Regular Health Care Provider 104,000 17% 187,000 30% 466,000 17% 878,000 36%
County or Community Clinic as 36,000 6% 15,000 2% 52,000 2% 304,000 12%
Regular Health Care Provider
Private MD/HMO as Regular 395,000 63% 363,000 58% 1,838,000 68% 956,000 39%
Health Care Provider
Difficulty Obtaining Needed 77,000 29% 124,000 36% 316,000 23% 550,000 47%
Medical Care
Uninsured Children 33,000 14% 46,000 20% 57,000 10% 556,000 33%
No Physician Visit in past 3,000 3% * 4,000 4% * 3,000 1% * 88,000 11%
12 months, children 6 years
Health Risk Behavior
Heavy Alcohol Drinker 13,000 2% 11,000 2% 170,000 6% 130,000 5%
HIV Testing in past 2 years 291,000 47% 161,000 43% 810,000 30% 1,053,000 43%
Tobacco 131,000 21% 108,000 17% 564,000 21% 387,000 16%
Self-Reported Health Conditions
Cancer 6,000 1% 9,000 1% * 67,000 2% 16,000 1% *
Heart Disease 36,000 6% * 39,000 6% 155,000 6% 78,000 3%
Kidney Disease 10,000 2% 14,000 2% * 30,000 1% 51,000 2%
*Note: Prevalence for this subgroup is based on small numbers (fewer than 30 respondents in the subgroup)
Source: Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, 1997 Los Angeles County Health Survey.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.19 ARRESTS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP, ADULT AND JUVENILE
Los Angeles County, 1998
Adult Arrests
Juvenile Arrests
Total White Hispanic Black Other Total White Hispanic Black Other
Felony Arrests - Total 147,565 26,319 56,597 38,862 5,397 64,730 11,173 36,196 13,500 3,861
Violent Offenses
Homicide 741 89 420 195 37 145 7 86 36 16
Manslaughter, Vehic. 28 5 13 6 4 7 0 3 4 0
Forcible Rape 733 110 348 239 36 94 12 42 39 1
Robbery 6,749 725 3,278 2,552 194 2,681 168 1,309 1,058 146
Assault 31,869 5,838 15,453 8,901 1,677 3,248 449 1,659 932 208
Kidnapping 575 57 308 168 42 51 2 33 6 10
Total 40,695 6,824 19,820 12,061 1,990 6,226 638 3,132 2,075 381
Property Offenses
Burglary 10,486 2,215 4,846 2,933 492 4,844 741 2,493 1,256 354
Theft 11,647 2,764 4,634 3,605 644 1,918 248 1,056 497 117
Motor Vehicle Theft 5,052 818 2,553 1,516 165 2,392 185 1,461 621 125
Forgery-Cks-AC 4,201 810 1,442 1,696 253 205 41 84 70 10
Arson 197 65 59 68 5 160 48 69 34 9
Total 31,583 6,672 13,534 9,818 1,559 9,519 1,263 5,163 2,478 615
Drug Offenses
Narcotics 27,093 3,336 11,675 11,456 626 1,212 54 868 268 22
Marijuana 3,260 538 1,227 1,443 52 614 106 334 159 15
Dangerous Drugs 10,666 5,572 3,987 620 487 486 135 286 35 30
Other 599 281 240 53 25 17 5 8 2 2
Total 41,618 9,727 17,129 13,572 1,190 2,329 300 1,496 464 69
Sex Offenses
Lewd or Lasciv. 718 126 453 115 24 204 22 122 57 3
Other 883 186 369 277 51 126 11 63 49 3
Total 1,601 312 822 392 75 330 33 185 106 6
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.19 ARRESTS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP, ADULT AND JUVENILE - Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1998
Adult Arrests
Juvenile Arrests
Felony Arrests Total White Hispanic Black Other Total White Hispanic Black Other
Other Offenses
Weapons 3,584 715 1,745 986 138 1,482 193 937 273 79
Drive under infl 1,321 331 761 143 86 12 3 6 2 1
Hit-and-Run 352 47 216 57 32 31 6 19 5 1
Escape 48 13 19 14 2 7 0 4 3 0
Bookmaking 98 36 2 44 16 0 0 0 0 0
Other 6,275 1,642 2,549 1,775 309 454 70 262 76 46
Total 11,678 2,784 5,292 3,019 583 1,986 272 1,228 359 127
Total: Felony Arrest Rate per 100,000** 2,062.30 1,187.78 2,201.49 6,746.75 671.28 1,993.17 1,126.08 1,989.28 5,048.58 1,102.61
Violent Offenses 659.92 307.97 770.95 2,093.88 247.52 608.60 286.69 556.09 1,910.95 350.66
Property Offenses 512.16 301.11 526.44 1,704.48 193.91 930.50 567.54 916.69 2,282.08 566.03
Drug Offenses 674.89 438.98 666.28 2,356.21 148.01 227.66 134.81 265.62 427.32 63.51
Sex Offenses 25.96 14.08 31.97 68.05 9.33 32.26 14.83 32.85 97.62 5.52
Other Offenses 189.37 125.64 205.85 524.12 72.51 194.14 122.22 218.03 330.62 116.89
Misdemeanor Arrests - Total 235,153 59,005 112,868 52,174 11,106 28,769 6,095 15,330 5,574 1,770
Manslaughter-Misd. 4 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Assault-Battery 11,528 2,836 4,839 3,182 671 2,758 468 1,320 846 124
Petty Theft 15,076 3,237 6,912 3,667 1,260 7,321 1,222 3,337 2,126 636
Other Theft 1,044 307 405 202 130 78 20 38 12 8
Cks/Acc-Cds 86 26 22 34 4 16 6 6 2 2
Marijuana 9,289 2,080 3,673 3,231 305 3,816 871 2,124 690 131
Other Drugs 16,145 5,231 5,482 5,072 360 486 129 310 32 15
Indecent Exposure 468 152 178 112 26 28 10 10 8 0
Annoying Child 91 29 46 16 0 8 5 1 1 1
Obscene Matter 18 11 1 2 4 1 0 1 0 0
Lewd Conduct 3,298 1,335 1,121 629 213 118 28 45 43 2
Prostitution 7,100 1,676 2,494 2,412 518 97 8 32 52 5
Contrib.Delinq.Minor 121 27 64 21 9 5 2 2 1 0
Drunk 14,740 4,718 7,562 1,963 497 415 112 250 35 18
Liquor Laws 12,727 3,762 6,267 2,049 649 703 214 402 58 29
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.19 ARRESTS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP, ADULT AND JUVENILE - Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1998
Adult Arrests
Juvenile Arrests
Total White Hispanic Black Other Total White Hispanic Black Other
Misdemeanor Arrests
Disord.Conduct 573 152 214 191 16 45 11 26 8 0
Disturb.Peace 1,719 400 733 520 66 1,129 170 490 397 72
Vandalism 2,211 455 1,246 408 102 2,742 393 2,065 200 84
Malicious Misch. 92 23 35 31 3 68 12 38 11 7
Trespassing 4,526 1,094 1,854 1,424 153 869 215 446 155 53
Weapons 1,477 308 666 426 77 439 38 285 96 20
Driving Under Infl. 44,714 10,803 26,051 4,532 3,328 208 78 106 9 15
Hit-and-Run 534 116 324 48 46 57 21 20 9 7
Sel.Traffic 3,970 1,279 1,564 941 186 174 48 78 32 16
Joy Riding 20 2 14 4 0 22 3 13 3 3
Gambling 612 24 375 178 35 43 2 19 21 1
Nonsupport 73 25 30 17 1 0 0 0 0 0
Glue Sniffing 53 20 27 2 4 16 2 13 1 0
City/Co.Ordinances 49,454 9,758 24,402 13,871 1,423 3,675 927 2,156 359 233
FTA-Non-Traffic 25,012 7,347 12,111 4,950 604 69 12 34 17 6
Other Misdemeanor 8,378 1,771 4,154 2,037 416 3,363 1,068 1,663 350 282
Status Offenses - Total 15,571 2,572 9,662 2,444 893
Truancy 0 0 0 0 0 1,016 319 445 117 135
Runaway 0 0 0 0 0 609 213 219 133 44
Curfew 0 0 0 0 0 13,671 1,984 8,835 2,145 707
Incorrigible 0 0 0 0 0 111 32 55 20 4
Other Status Offenses 0 0 0 0 0 164 24 108 29 3
Source: California Department of Justice, Criminal Justice Statistics Center, California Criminal Justice Profile 1998: Los Angeles County.
Population estimates from Claritas, 1998.
* Total Column includes arrests for which race/ethnic group was not reported.
** Rates per 100,000 population in age group based on Claritas 1998 estimate.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.20 JUVENILES SUPERVISED BY CALIFORNIA YOUTH AUTHORITY BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1999
Race/Ethnic Group
First
Commitment
Juvenile & Adult Offenders
Parolees
Total
Population
Incarcerated
Latino 311 783 1,047
African American 244 484 834
Asian 12 56 56
Filipino 1 10 11
Pacific Islander 1 6 8
White 28 62 85
Other 4 2 5
Total 601 1,403 2,046
Source: California Youth Authority.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 2.21 FAMILY/HOUSEHOLD TYPE BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990
Persons or Households
African American Asian
Household/Family Type Total American Indian Pacific Latino White
Total Persons 8,863,164 992,974 45,508 954,485 3,351,242 3,618,850
In Households 8,691,099 961,355 44,397 944,270 3,309,893 3,528,002
Total Households 2,989,552 352,679 14,880 276,886 784,171 1,585,338
Persons Per Household 2.91 2.72 2.94 3.34 4.14 2.27
Family Households 2,013,926 231,011 9,962 215,225 654,630 922,230
Persons Per Family 3.51 3.36 3.50 3.78 4.32 2.91
With children under 18 1,015,965 119,940 5,312 118,500 433,253 351,101
Married Couple 739,735 53,538 3,292 101,505 312,181 277,217
Female householder 208,090 57,145 1,562 12,674 83,542 56,149
Male householder 68,140 9,257 458 4,321 37,530 17,735
With no children under 18
Married couple 714,695 57,698 2,860 68,758 129,737 459,470
Female householder 182,340 41,076 1,220 16,089 49,264 76,571
Male householder 322,290 88,964 2,324 12,674 95,276 56,235
Non-family households 975,626 121,668 4,918 61,661 129,541 663,108
In Group quarters 172,065 31,619 1,111 10,215 41,349 90,848
Correctional institutions 28,727 10,415 146 291 14,145 4,815
Nursing homes 47,629 3,872 69 1,818 3,568 38,382
Other institutions 17,485 4,367 171 533 4,300 8,347
Other Group Quarters
College dormitories 31,805 2,281 142 5,831 3,285 20,454
Military quarters 7,518 1,537 108 481 660 4,863
Homeless or in shelter 12,031 5,294 263 232 4,355 3,013
Drug/alcohol group homes 2,855 1,250 62 30 484 1,073
Other noninstitutional group quarters 24,015 2,603 150 999 10,552 9,901
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990 CP-1-6.
1996 State of the County Report, United Way of Greater Los Angeles

FUELING THE ECONOMIC ENGINE

FUELING THE ECONOMIC ENGINE: Key Findings
The Latino economic engine in Los Angeles includes the emerging Latino business
sector, workers employed in various industrial sectors, the buying power of Latinos at all
income levels, and assets such as homes, savings and investments.
THE LATINO ECONOMIC CLIMATE
•=
•=
•=
The climate of economic opinion among Latinos is strongly optimistic, as revealed in
statewide polls conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California. Latinos
throughout the state were more optimistic than the general public with regard to
family finances and the direction the state is heading. (Table 3.01)
46% of Latinos statewide said that their family is better off economically than a year
ago in a September 1999 poll, compared to 34% of the general population. 56% of
Latinos expected to be better off next year while 45% of the general population had
that expectation. (Table 3.01)
66% of Latinos responded that things in California are going in the right direction,
compared to 60% in the general public. (Table 3.01)
•= Latinos were somewhat more restrained in their view of the state’s economy: 66%
thought that over the next year we will have good times financially, compared to 71%
of the general population. (Table 3.01)
•=
The business leaders focus group conducted as part of this study revealed extremely
positive and optimistic perspectives among Latino business people.
LATINO BUSINESS SECTOR
•= By 1998, the number of Latino owned businesses was estimated at 208,000, a 92%
increase from 1992, when the Census of Businesses counted 109,000 Latino-owned
businesses with receipts of $7.8 billion. (Table 3.02)
Latino Owned Businesses
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
1987 1992 1997
1

•= In 1998 Latino firms had 90,561 paid employees, a 40% increase from the 1992 level
of 11,200 Latino firms with 65,000 employees. (Table 3.04)
•=
•=
Latino firms in Los Angeles County generated $16.6 billion in sales in 1998, more
than double the sales level in 1992. (Table 3.04)
In 1992 Latino firms produced a payroll of one billion dollars. By 1998 sales more
than doubled, rising to $2.5 billion. (Table 3.04)
GROWING NUMBER OF WOMEN AND
MINORITY-OWNED BUSINESSES
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
Women African American Latino Asian/American Indian
•=
•=
•=
•=
Most Latino firms are in the services sector which accounts for 103,000 firms,
followed by construction with 24,000 firms. (Table 3.04)
The industries with least representation of Latino businesses are wholesale, with
3,500 firms, and manufacturing at 6,200 firms. (Table 3.04)
Most Latino owned businesses in the county are located in the City of Los Angeles,
with 78,600 Latino firms in 1998. Other cities with large numbers of Latino owned
businesses are Long Beach (5,100) and South Gate (5,700). (Table 3.03)
63% of Latino owned firms counted in the 1992 economic census belonged to
Mexican origin owners, and 25% had Central or South American origin owners.
(Table 3.05)
LATINO LABOR FORCE
•=
With 1.8 million workers, Latinos are 40% of the labor force in 1999, up from 35% in
1990 and 24% in 1980. (Table 3.06)
2

•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
•=
65.8% of Latino adults are in the labor force (working or unemployed and looking for
work), compared to 63% of African Americans, 60% of Asians and 67% of Whites.
(Table 3.06)
Latinos males are highest in labor force participation rate among all ethnic groups,
with 79% working or looking for work in 1999, compared to 65% of African
American, 68% of Asian and 75% of White males. (Table 3.07)
53% of Latinas were in the labor force in 1999, lower than the African American rate
of 65% or 68% for Asian and 75% for White women. This level of Latina labor force
participation represents a major increase from prior decades in which the proportion
of women working outside the home was much lower. 1990 data show that the
highest labor force rates for Latinas are found in one-parent families, with 63% of
mothers of preschoolers and 69% of mothers of school age children working outside
the home. In two-parent families, 46% of mothers of preschoolers and 51% of
women with school age children worked outside the home. In two-parent families
less than 30% of parents both worked full time. (Table 3.11)
It is not clear why the mid-‘90s estimates based on Current Population Survey data
show labor force participation for Latinos which are lower than rates reported in the
1990 census. We speculate that the difference is due to a more complete response
from households with lower labor force participation, meaning that these households
have lower incomes and thus the higher poverty rates found in the CPS.
In spite of the high level of labor force participation, the Latino unemployment rate is
consistently higher than the county average, with 8.1% of Latinos out of work at a
time when the county average unemployment rate was 6.9%. Much of the higher
Latino unemployment rate is due to working in occupations or industries where many
of the available jobs are not permanent. (Table 3.06)
There are striking ethnic disparities among occupations, with Latinos and African
Americans concentrated in lower paid jobs and Whites and Asians in higher paid
work. For example, 30% of Latinos work as operators and laborers, more than twice
the rate of any other group. (Table 3.08)
One of the key findings in labor research is the role of ethnic niche occupations in
providing employment for recent immigrants who are frequently recruited by relatives
or acquaintances who have gotten established in the Los Angeles labor market. Niche
occupations for some groups have come to employ increasing percentages of the
workforce; for example, it has been estimated that by 1990 as many as 72% of
Mexican immigrants worked in Mexican niche occupations. These occupations
typically pay less than occupations of other ethnic groups and tend to contribute to the
region’s economic polarization. (Waldinger and Bozorgmehr, Ch. 9)
3

•=
Latinos are much more likely to work in the private sector than other groups. 87% of
Latinos are employed in the private sector, 7% are in government employment and
6% are self-employed. Corresponding rates for non-Latinos are 69% in the private
sector, 14% in government and 17% self-employed. (Table 3.09)
INCOMES & BUYING POWER
•=
•=
The Latino income distribution has the greatest concentration at the low end of the
scale, with a declining share in each subsequent income category. 59% of Latinos or
2.6 million residents live in households with incomes less than $25,000. 28% are in
the $25,00-49,000 bracket, 8% in the $50,000-74,000 category, and 5% have incomes
over $75,000. (Table 3.18)
The Latino pattern is a sharp contrast with non-Latinos, with a distribution which is
much flatter and somewhat U-shaped with higher percentages at both ends of the
scale than in the middle categories. About 30% of non-Latinos have incomes under
$25,000 and about 25% are in the $75,000+ bracket.
Percent
70
Household Income - 1998
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
$0-24,000 $25-49,000 $50-74,000 $75,000+
Latinos
Non-Latinos
•=
•=
•=
Another way to look at income distribution is by dividing incomes into equal
intervals. Displaying Los Angeles County incomes in quartiles (each about ¼ of all
incomes) shows that 30% of Latinos are in the lowest one-fourth of incomes, 36% in
the second ¼, 20% in the third ¼ and 14% in the top income category. (see Table
3.19) This distribution differs from African Americans in that their distribution is
slightly higher at both ends of the scale. For Asians, the highest percentage of
incomes (34%) is at the top end of the scale, and this pattern is amplified for Whites,
with 46% of the population in households with incomes of $75,000 or more.
Income polarization is a key trend which is expected to within the Latino community,
as the trend toward lower incomes for those with less than college education
continues and incomes rise for the more highly educated.
Although not an upscale market, the buying power of Latino households in Los
Angeles rose to $112 billion by 1997. This formidable economic force is being
4

increasingly recognized by businesses and its influence assessed for selling everything
from groceries to banking services and radio advertising.
Billion
$120
$100
$80
$60
$40
$20
$0
Latino Buying Power in L.A.
1990-97
1990 1997
Among Latinos with incomes over $25,000, 81% have no savings or investments,
compared to 61% for non-Latinos in this income bracket. Considerable notice has been
given in the past year to the relatively underdeveloped market for investment
and financial planning among mid-to higher income Latinos, and services and products
are being developed to cultivate this market. (Table 3.20)
Poverty
•= Striking ethnic differences in poverty pose a troubling scenario for an area with a
steadily growing ethnic population. The most disproportionate poverty rate is among
Latinos, who are 44% of the population but 68% of the poor. (Table 3.15)
Large Majority of Poor are Latino
White
14%
Asian
9%
African
American
9%
Latino
68%
•=
•=
31% of Latino adults and 43% of children are below the poverty level, the highest rate
among ethnic groups in Los Angeles.
The Latino poverty rate has climbed dramatically since 1990, increasing from 22% to
35% during the peak of the recession, and then declining to 30% in 1999. (Table
3.12)
5

• = The greatest concentrations of Latino poor, listed by zip code in Table 3.13, are in
East Los Angeles, southeastern cities such as Bell Gardens and Cudahy, South Central
Los Angeles, Compton, Long Beach and Hollywood.
•= Childhood poverty is greatest for Latino youth, with 630,000, 43% of all Latino
children below the poverty level. The poverty rate for African American children is
33% for American Indian youth, 34%, Asian Pacific children, 21% and for White
youth, 21%.
•=
U.S.-born Latinos have a somewhat lower poverty rate at 30% than Latinos who are
not citizens whose poverty rate is 36%. (Table 3.14)
Working Poor
•= 686,451 working adults are estimated to be below the poverty level in 1998, based on
the fact that 31.9% of those below the poverty level in Los Angeles were in the labor
force in 1990. This is probably an underestimate of the number of working poor due
to the undercount of low income Latinos in the 1990 Census, given that this is the
group most likely to be working at very low-wage jobs.
•=
A study on anticipated effects of welfare reform in Los Angeles County by the
Economic Roundtable noted that many Latinas leaving the welfare rolls will face
particular difficulties because of poor English skills, low levels of schooling and reentry
to occupations which are overcrowded, poorly paid and often provide only parttime
work.
•= Latinos are 56% of all residents who receive welfare payments as of 1999
although they are 68% of the county’s poor, a comparatively low rate of using
welfare assistance. However, thousands of new jobs plus basic education and
skill training will be needed to make it possible for 390,000 Latinos (including
children and adults) receiving welfare to attain incomes above the poverty
level. (Table 3.16)
Latinos on Public Assistance - 1998
Home care: elderly/disabled
Food Stamps only
M edical aid only
Single adults
Families with children
20,627
19,626
60,388
385,294
390,490
0 75,000 150,000 225,000 300,000 375,000 450,000
6

Housing and Home Ownership
•= 65.2% of Latinos were renters and 34.8% were homeowners in 1995, nearly the same
as the rental rate of 35.1% as reported in the1990 census. 51.9% of non-Latinos were
homeowners. (Table 3.26)
•= Median rent for Latinos in 1995 was reported at $597, and median home value was
$171,478. (Table 3.28)
•= Median monthly housing costs for Latino homeowners in 1995 were $1,019, with
22.7% paying under $400 and 51.5% paying more than $1,000. 27.8% of Latino
homeowners reported that monthly housing costs were less than 20% of their monthly
income, 28.9% paid 20-34% of their income, and 43.2% paid more than 35% of their
income for housing. Median income for Latino homeowners was $36,391. (Table
3.28)
•= Latino renters showed a much different pattern: their median income, at $20,238, was
much lower than homeowners, and while they paid less for housing costs it was a
much higher proportion of their income. 54% of renters paid more than 35% of their
income for rental costs.
•= Rental vacancy rates have fallen to a very low level in the county, indicating a
shortage of available housing. For buildings with 100 or more units, the vacancy rate
fell from 7% in 1995 to only 3% in 1998. The implication of low vacancy rates is that
scarcity tends to increase costs, a major issue for low income Latino families.
•=
FHA loans to Latinos in LA County skyrocketed nearly 700% during the ‘90s,
demonstrating strong demand and ability to purchase homes. The average
Latino loan amount in 1999 was $136,698. (Table 3.25)
Latino FHA Home Loans 1990-1999
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
Year
7

Table 3.01 PUBLIC OPINION POLL DATA ON FINANCIAL ISSUES
Los Angeles and California, September 1999
General Population Latinos
Topic/Rating Los Angeles California
You and your family are financially better off or worse off than a year ago
Better off 34% 46%
Worse off 13% 11%
Same 53% 43%
You and your family will be financially better off/worse off next year
Better off 45% 56%
Worse off 6% 4%
Same 47% 36%
Things in California are going in the right direction 60% 66%
During the next 12 months will we have good times financially or bad times
Good times 71% 66%
Bad times 24% 28%
Source: Public Policy Institute of California, PPIC Statewide Survey, September 1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.02 MINORITY AND WOMEN-OWNED BUSINESSES
Los Angeles County, 1972-1998*
Businesses/Receipts (in millions)
1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1998 Projection
Owners Firms Receipts Firms Receipts Firms Receipts Firms Receipts Firms Receipts Firms Receipts
Women - - - - 117,468 $3,789 162,417 $10,775 232,723 $28,674 333,463 $76,308
Minorities 22,778 $938 33,081 $1,751 61,851 $3,731 87,071 $8,173 124,854 $20,508 179,032 $51,460
Latino 12,084 $532 17,177 $867 29,982 $1,717 56,679 $3,346 109,104 $7,844 210,019 $18,389
African American 11,057 $359 14,699 $550 23,520 $775 23,932 $1,300 32,645 $3,618 44,530 $10,069
Asian/American Indian 11,721 $579 18,382 $1,201 38,331 $2,956 63,139 $6,873 92,209 $16,890 134,663 $41,507
Receipts are shown in millions, i.e. 1,300 indicates $1.3 billion.
*1997 Census of Business data on business ownership by race will become available in early 2000.
Source: U.S. Economic Census, 1972, 1977, 1982, 1987, 1992.
Latino Business Association, David E. Hayes-Bautista, "Latino Business Dynamics: 1998 Portrait", 1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.03 LATINO-OWNED FIRMS BY CITY
Los Angeles County
Estimated Number of Firms
City 1987 1992 1998
Baldwin Park 728 1,226 2,650
Bell 483 768 996
Bell Gardens 536 667 924
Burbank 569 1,338 2,224
Cudahy 152 280 434
Downey 664 1,457 3,129
El Monte 965 1,313 2,857
Glendale 799 1,814 3,270
Huntington Park 582 1,619 3,197
Inglewood 599 1,430 2,818
Long Beach 1,311 2,591 5,075
Los Angeles 21,819 47,673 78,578
Maywood 384 511 663
Montebello 853 1,345 2,236
Norwalk 923 1,323 2,677
Pasadena 707 1,472 2,884
Pico Rivera 1,027 1,335 2,567
Pomona 820 1,506 3,606
Santa Monica 452 1,044 1,525
South Gate 1,159 2,030 5,647
West Covina 946 1,272 1,744
Whittier 690 1,074 2,218
Source: Latino Business Association, David E. Hayes-Bautista,
"Latino Business Dynamics: A 1998 Portrait", 1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.04 LATINO FIRMS BY INDUSTRY
Los Angeles County, 1998 Estimate
Firms Sales Employees Payroll
Industry Number % Dollars (000) % Number % Dollars (000) %
Agriculture 8,521 4.1 $271,059 1.6 1,311 1.4 $47,163 1.9
Construction 24,160 11.6 $1,537,973 9.3 7,218 8.0 $290,967 11.8
Manufacturing 6,198 3.0 $1,772,815 10.7 16,283 18.0 $370,632 15.1
Transportation 17,772 8.5 $1,181,285 7.1 4,448 4.9 $118,623 4.8
Wholesale 3,505 1.7 $2,572,382 15.5 8,482 9.4 $236,462 9.6
Retail 21,938 10.5 $2,838,722 17.1 18,876 20.8 $326,902 13.3
Finance 11,103 5.3 $1,229,374 7.4 1,457 1.6 $127,879 5.2
Services 103,129 49.5 $4,979,829 30.0 32,040 35.4 $925,258 37.6
Not Classified 12,078 5.8 $218,154 1.3 446 0.5 $16,271 0.7
Total 208,404 100.0 $16,601,593 100.0 90,561 100.0 $2,460,157 100.0
Source: Latino Business Association, David E. Hayes-Bautista, "Latino Business Dynamics: A 1998 Portrait", 1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.05 HISPANIC-OWNED FIRMS BY ETHNICITY
Los Angeles County, 1992
All Firms
Firms with Paid Employees
Ethnic Group
Firms
(number)
Sales and
receipts
($1,000)
Firms
Number
Sales and
receipts
($1,000)
Employees
(number)
Annual
payroll
($1,000)
Relative standard error of
estimate (percent) for column
Mexican 68,723 4,738,361 7,163 3,258,179 40,236 612,903 1 4 3 6
Puerto Rican 1,585 190,393 149 163,480 1,190 30,672 7 11 22 12
Cuban 3,331 650,446 566 526,583 4,404 71,507 5 20 13 25
Other Central or South American 27,496 1,533,685 2,454 991,820 13,559 197,668 2 7 6 11
European Spanish 3,904 339,371 447 298,529 2,852 47,550 4 7 13 8
Other Hispanic 4,064 331,841 445 230,147 3,006 49,548 4 5 14 6
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1992 Census of Businesses, Minority-Owned Business Enterprises.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.06 EMPLOYMENT AND LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1970 to 1998-99 Average
Persons Age 16 and Over
Civilian Labor Force Status 1970 % 1980 % 1990 % 1998-99 %
Latino
Employed 445,281 92.9 835,264 92.1 1,413,449 89.9 1,814,168 91.9
Unemployed 33,933 7.1 71,821 7.9 158,561 10.1 160,318 8.1
In labor force 479,214 61.0 907,085 67.1 1,572,010 69.6 1,974,486 65.8
Not in labor force 306,561 39.0 444,268 32.9 688,221 30.4 1,027,944 34.2
African American
Employed 259,093 90.1 366,545 89.6 401,260 88.0 341,106 87.2
Unemployed 28,476 9.9 42,442 10.4 54,798 12.0 50,048 12.8
In labor force 287,569 60.4 408,987 61.0 456,058 62.6 391,154 62.8
Not in labor force 188,338 39.6 261,198 39.0 273,033 37.4 231,692 37.2
American Indian
Employed n/a 23,939 90.5 20,856 89.8 n/a
Unemployed n/a 2,502 9.5 2,357 10.2 n/a
In labor force n/a 26,441 65.2 23,213 69.4 n/a
Not in labor force n/a 14,141 34.8 10,218 30.6 n/a
Asian Pacific
Employed n/a 226,986 96.3 463,887 94.9 523,523 94.4
Unemployed n/a 8,600 3.7 24,747 5.1 30,847 5.6
In labor force n/a 235,586 68.2 488,634 66.4 554,370 60.0
Not in labor force n/a 109,998 31.8 246,975 33.6 369,753 40.0
White
Employed n/a 2,497,513 94.8 1,932,271 95.2 1,912,037 95.2
Unemployed n/a 135,922 5.2 97,589 4.8 95,698 4.8
In labor force n/a 2,633,435 64.8 2,029,860 66.6 2,007,737 67.4
Not in labor force n/a 1,431,017 35.2 1,016,579 33.4 970,418 32.6
Total*
Employed 2,826,565 93.8 3,471,764 94.0 4,203,792 92.6 4,619,673 93.2
Unemployed 187,551 6.2 222,919 6.0 334,572 7.4 339,574 6.9
In labor force 3,014,116 60.5 3,694,683 64.8 4,538,364 67.1 4,959,253 65.5
Not in labor force 1,967,409 39.5 2,005,011 35.2 2,221,532 32.9 2,608,532 34.5
* Race and Latino ethnicity overlap since Latinos may be of any race. 1990 shows White Non-Hispanic. The total is unduplicated.
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1970, 1980, 1990.
Current Population Survey March Supplement: 1998-1999
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles

Table 3.07 LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION BY SEX AND ETHNIC GROUP
(Two Year Averages)
Los Angeles County, 1990-1999
Females Age 16 and Over
Race/Ethnic Group*
Total
1990 1992-1993 1995-1996 1998-1999
In Labor
Force % Total
In Labor
Force % Total
In Labor
Force % Total
In Labor
Force %
Latina 1,092,549 615,954 56.4 1,279,451 603,121 47.1 1,384,799 666,847 48.2 1,503,770 794,525 52.8
African American 395,094 232,382 58.8 353,188 178,471 50.5 355,781 200,009 56.2 360,427 219,941 61.0
Asian 382,821 225,298 58.9 428,719 257,289 60.0 394,411 198,891 50.4 491,890 261,673 53.2
White 1,562,264 898,529 57.5 1,533,298 892,353 58.2 1,472,859 812,702 55.2 1,516,438 910,331 60.0
Total 3,432,728 1,972,163 57.5 3,594,656 1,931,234 53.7 3,607,850 1,878,449 52.1 3,872,525 2,186,470 56.5
Males Age 16 and Over
Latino 1,170,226 958,600 81.9 1,279,302 1,013,485 79.2 1,394,331 1,098,439 78.8 1,498,660 1,179,961 78.7
African American 337,426 227,105 67.3 285,609 186,632 65.3 311,302 196,078 63.0 262,419 171,213 65.2
Asian 354,270 264,818 74.8 406,644 290,549 71.5 352,470 239,219 67.9 432,233 292,697 67.7
White 1,495,741 1,142,897 76.4 1,525,625 1,099,505 72.1 1,402,997 988,626 70.5 1,461,715 1,097,404 75.1
Total 3,357,663 2,593,420 77.2 3,497,180 2,590,171 74.1 3,461,100 2,522,362 72.9 3,655,027 2,741,275 75.0
Total Age 16 and Over
Latino 2,262,775 1,574,554 69.6 2,558,753 1,616,606 63.2 2,779,130 1,765,286 63.5 3,002,430 1,974,486 65.8
African American 732,520 459,487 62.7 638,797 365,103 57.2 667,083 396,087 59.4 622,846 391,154 62.8
Asian 737,091 490,116 66.5 835,363 547,838 65.6 746,881 438,110 58.7 924,123 554,370 60.0
White 3,058,005 2,041,426 66.8 3,058,923 1,991,858 65.1 2,875,856 1,801,328 62.6 2,978,153 2,007,735 67.4
Total 6,790,391 4,565,583 67.2 7,091,836 4,521,405 63.8 7,068,950 4,400,811 62.3 7,527,552 4,927,745 65.5
*Note: Does not include American Indian or Other categories because small numbers make results unreliable.
Source: U.S. Census of Population 1990.
U.S.Bureau of Census, March Supplement: 1992-1999.

Table 3.08 OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORIES BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1998
Occupation Total %
Persons in Labor Force
African
American % Asian % White % Latino %
Managerial/professional 1,537,761 30.8 118,534 28.5 223,918 40.8 978,381 48.1 216,928 10.9
Technical, clerical & sales 1,383,606 27.7 160,390 38.6 171,061 31.2 613,183 30.2 438,972 22.0
Service occupations 722,202 14.5 74,754 18.0 61,853 11.3 163,925 8.1 421,670 21.2
Blue collar occupations* 1,345,750 27.0 61,853 14.9 92,218 16.8 276,658 13.6 915,021 45.9
Total 4,989,319 100.0 415,531 100.0 549,050 100.0 2,032,147 100.0 1,992,591 100.0
Note: Does not include American Indian or other categories because small numbers make results unreliable.
*Farming, forestry, fishing, precision production, operators, fabricators and laborers.
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement: 1998 .
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.09 PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
(Three Year Average Estimates)
Los Angeles County, 1996-1998
Persons in Labor Force
Class of Workers Total % Non-Latino % Latino %
Private Sector 3,641,000 76.1 2,013,000 69.1 1,628,000 87.1
Government 544,000 11.4 407,000 14.0 137,000 7.3
Self-Employed 598,000 12.5 494,000 17.0 104,000 5.6
Total 4,783,000 100.0 2,914,000 100.0 1,869,000 100.0
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement: 1996-1998.
http://ferret.bls.census.gov
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.10 WORKERS IN FAMILY BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990
African
American % Asian %
Persons
American
Indian % White % Latino %
Workers in Family Total %
Families
No workers 230,963 11.3 43,549 18.7 18,646 8.5 1,003 10.6 116,400 12.5 52,690 8.0
1 worker 605,997 29.8 76,038 32.7 58,686 26.8 3,060 32.2 266,856 28.6 205,175 31.3
2 workers 867,895 42.6 84,212 36.2 97,169 44.4 3,930 41.3 438,759 47.1 248,283 37.9
3 or more workers 331,249 16.3 28,559 12.3 44,323 20.3 1,512 15.9 110,473 11.8 148,525 22.7
Total 2,036,104 100.0 232,358 100.0 218,824 100.0 9,505 100.0 932,488 100.0 654,673 100.0
Married-couple families
No workers 143,370 6.2 12,454 6.8 13,256 4.7 374 3.9 94,849 8.0 22,835 3.4
1 worker 372,796 16.1 24,180 13.2 42,141 15.1 1,569 16.2 186,238 15.7 120,565 17.8
2 or more workers 974,549 42.0 77,473 42.4 119,761 42.8 4,167 43.1 473,189 40.0 304,734 44.9
Husband & wife worked 831,789 35.8 68,661 37.6 104,610 37.4 3,552 36.8 428,902 36.2 230,026 33.9
Total 2,322,504 100.0 182,768 100.0 279,768 100.0 9,662 100.0 1,183,178 100.0 678,160 100.0
Single parent
No worker 75,076 19.6 27,907 28.2 4,109 14.8 590 23.6 17,557 13.7 25,704 19.9
1 worker 162,815 42.5 42,373 42.8 10,805 38.9 1,075 42.9 58,413 45.6 51,424 39.9
2 or more workers 145,064 37.9 28,669 29.0 12,856 46.3 839 33.5 52,092 40.7 51,805 40.2
Total 382,955 100.0 98,949 100.0 27,770 100.0 2,504 100.0 128,062 100.0 128,933 100.0
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.11 WOMEN WITH CHILDREN BY LABOR FORCE STATUS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990
Presence and Age of Children Total %
Parents of Children 0-17
African
American % Asian %
American
Indian % White % Latino %
Children under 6 years living with two parents 579,941 36,310 67,510 2,022 198,558 280,320 100.0
Both parents in labor force 290,703 50.1 22,911 63.1 37,709 55.9 1,084 53.6 102,828 51.8 128,926 46.0
Both at work 35 or more hours 162,609 28.0 14,213 39.1 25,948 38.4 516 25.5 50,524 25.4 72,895 26.0
Children under 6 years living with one parent 241,703 60,503 11,592 1,621 36,778 135,402 100.0
Parent in labor force 144,492 59.8 30,129 49.8 6,829 58.9 889 54.8 24,674 67.1 84,347 62.3
At work 35 or more hours 99,005 41.0 17,877 59.3 5,206 76.2 536 33.1 18,157 49.4 58,674 43.3
Children 6 to 17 years living with two parents 955,435 63,044 134,026 3,654 295,779 466,005 100.0
Both parents in labor force 537,102 56.2 42,841 68.0 80,341 59.9 2,096 57.4 177,367 60.0 238,953 51.3
Both at work 35 or more hours 308,883 32.3 28,128 65.7 56,583 70.4 1,063 29.1 91,699 31.0 134,329 28.8
Children 6 to 17 years living with one parent 394,197 96,405 24,132 2,584 85,357 190,878 100.0
Parent in labor force 275,797 70.0 60,105 62.3 16,609 68.8 1,864 51.0 69,175 81.0 131,471 68.9
At work 35 or more hours 202,075 51.3 41,643 69.3 13,021 78.4 1,392 38.1 54,264 63.6 94,236 49.4
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990.
Note: Percentages do not add to 100%. The percentages show the proportion of each cell where parents are in the labor force or work 35 or more hours per week. Fpr example, in the total column
in 50% of homes with children under 6 living with both parents, both mother and father are in the labor force and in 28% of the homes both parents work full time, while for African
Americans, in 63% of homes with children under 6 living both parents, both mother and father are in labor force and in 39% of the homes both parents work full time.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.12 POVERTY RATE BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990-1999
Race/Ethnic Group
Total African Asian/
Year Number Percent American Indian/Other* White Latino
1970 752,554 10.9 24.0 n/a 8.1 14.7
1980 984816 13.4 23.1 12.8 9.9 20.5
1990 1,308,255 15.1 25.4 13.2 8.3 22.5
1991 1,563,965 17.4 25.9 9.8 8.9 29.0
1992 1,921,517 20.5 27.7 11.6 8.8 33.1
1993 1,977,803 21.1 25.8 11.4 9.9 33.8
1994 2,171,314 23.0 22.7 18.5 9.0 35.7
1995 2,270,480 24.4 28.6 19.9 11.0 35.2
1996 2,261,319 22.7 27.3 16.4 9.0 35.0
1997 2,128,018 21.4 22.7 18.1 10.5 31.5
1998 2,187,618 21.5 29.8 13.5 8.4 32.6
1999 1,908,224 19.2 22.2 17.4 6.0 30.3
*Asian Pacific, American Indian and Other have been combined since the CPS sample is too small for separate reliable estimates.
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.13 LATINOS BELOW POVERTY LEVEL BY AGE GROUP BY COMMUNITY
Los Angeles County, 1997
Persons
Community 0-4 5-14 15-24 25-64 65+ Total
Acton - Uninc. 20 78 55 161 4 318
Alhambra 1,020 1,742 1,301 2,782 410 7,255
Altadena CDP 301 503 462 1,025 58 2,349
Angeles Forest - SFV 0 1 11 8 0 20
Angeles Forest - SGV 0 3 1 7 0 11
Angeles Forest North 62 137 189 577 81 1,046
Arcadia 111 260 216 727 40 1,354
Artesia 154 279 209 404 87 1,133
Athens CDP 1,221 2,106 1,130 2,566 106 7,129
Atwater-Glassell - City of LA 964 1,957 1,357 3,135 366 7,779
Azusa 1,309 2,415 1,658 3,633 526 9,541
Baldwin Park 1,959 3,969 2,917 5,337 538 14,720
Bassett CDP* 180 348 351 773 94 1,746
Bell Gardens 2,390 4,292 3,022 5,266 213 15,183
Bell-Cudahy 3,667 5,459 4,084 8,795 529 22,534
Bellflower 804 977 856 2,208 147 4,992
Beverly Glen - City of LA 0 0 7 107 0 114
Beverly Hills 7 26 34 304 18 389
Boyle Heights - City of LA 4,700 8,374 6,208 12,996 1,689 33,967
Bradbury 0 0 1 12 0 13
Brentwood - City of LA 0 3 11 92 3 109
Burbank 682 1,231 998 2,291 485 5,687
Calabasas-Agoura -LA 13 14 44 260 8 339
Canoga Park - City of LA 1,306 2,041 1,228 3,869 176 8,620
Canyon Country - Uninc. 27 70 47 93 3 240
Carson 527 1,409 1,044 2,102 344 5,426
Catalina Is. 35 85 127 296 20 563
Central LA - City of LA 992 1,614 121 883 172 3,782
Cerritos 26 86 82 174 29 397
Chatsworth - City of LA 487 693 522 1,667 47 3,416
Latino Profile Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.13 LATINOS BELOW POVERTY LEVEL BY AGE BY COMMUNITY, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1997
Persons
Community 0-4 5-14 15-24 25-64 65+ Total
Chinatown - City of LA 45 63 51 218 17 394
Claremont 50 147 135 217 12 561
Commerce 443 784 731 1,428 217 3,603
Compton 4,241 6,453 4,692 8,971 502 24,859
Compton South 7 18 10 11 2 48
Covina 426 892 764 1,908 226 4,216
Crenshaw - City of LA 1,433 2,135 1,614 3,900 255 9,337
Culver City 183 439 306 852 30 1,810
Diamond Bar 23 66 92 278 45 504
Downey 883 2,041 1,716 4,223 323 9,186
Duarte 232 444 379 826 24 1,905
Eagle Rock - City of LA 251 681 544 1,059 103 2,638
East Los Angeles CDP* 6,235 10,988 7,856 15,969 2,444 43,492
East Pasadena CDP* 76 128 95 250 31 580
East San Gabriel CDP* 193 253 173 425 52 1,096
Echo Park - City of LA 3,738 5,703 2,647 8,019 471 20,578
Edwards AFB 0 0 5 16 1 22
El Monte 4,430 8,866 5,411 11,094 564 30,365
El Segundo 6 14 25 135 8 188
El Sereno - City of LA 1,633 2,757 2,305 4,599 629 11,923
Elysian Park - City of LA 583 1,141 750 1,854 213 4,541
Encino - City of LA 97 147 138 667 21 1,070
Exposition Park - City of LA 5,645 8,525 5,623 14,352 805 34,950
Florence-Graham CDP* 3,195 5,225 3,155 6,100 306 17,981
Gardena 569 1,136 661 1,829 292 4,487
Glendale 1,231 1,883 1,488 4,432 574 9,608
Glendora 87 127 153 409 34 810
Granada Hills - City of LA 28 72 111 486 39 736
Hacienda Heights CDP* 283 585 567 1,093 226 2,754
Harbor City - City of LA 552 786 516 1,427 106 3,387
Harbor Gateway CDP* 109 292 161 336 59 957
Latino Profile Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.13 LATINOS BELOW POVERTY LEVEL BY AGE BY COMMUNITY, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1997
Persons
Community 0-4 5-14 15-24 25-64 65+ Total
Hawaiian Gardens 814 1,445 805 1,567 160 4,791
Hawthorne 1,834 2,680 1,479 3,930 317 10,240
Hermosa Beach 2 2 8 94 6 112
Highland Park - City of LA 1,937 2,523 2,576 5,525 409 12,970
Hollywood - City of LA 5,523 8,078 5,653 19,844 1,012 40,110
Hollywood Hills - City of LA 117 388 160 945 73 1,683
Huntington Park 3,903 5,651 3,415 7,475 628 21,072
Industry 391 728 584 1,204 190 3,097
Inglewood 2,273 3,912 2,523 6,039 274 15,021
Irwindale 31 77 69 105 30 312
Koreatown - City of LA 4,983 8,253 3,024 10,624 537 27,421
L.A. Strip - City of LA 1,156 1,785 1,057 2,600 133 6,731
La Canada-Flintridge 0 4 15 79 1 99
La Crescenta CDP 61 104 97 236 17 515
La Habra Heights 0 0 9 49 1 59
La Mirada 139 323 286 664 61 1,473
La Puente-Valinda 1,485 2,799 2,332 4,599 458 11,673
La Verne 74 166 141 286 114 781
Ladera Heights 2 2 3 32 0 39
Lake Hughes - Uninc. 6 28 46 59 1 140
Lake Los Angeles CDP* 84 272 280 546 0 1,182
Lakewood 165 308 219 570 69 1,331
Lancaster 914 1,746 1,273 2,266 178 6,377
Lawndale 641 732 689 2,001 114 4,177
Leimert - City of LA 781 1,219 843 2,112 138 5,093
Lennox CDP* 1,457 2,543 1,481 3,112 198 8,791
Lincoln Heights - City of LA 1,326 2,643 1,740 3,773 713 10,195
Lomita 154 259 206 414 39 1,072
Long Beach 6,609 10,130 6,577 16,968 1,038 41,322
Los Nietos CDP* 460 869 747 1,342 124 3,542
Latino Profile Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.13 LATINOS BELOW POVERTY LEVEL BY AGE BY COMMUNITY, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1997
Persons
Community 0-4 5-14 15-24 25-64 65+ Total
Lynwood 2,989 5,381 3,275 6,285 467 18,397
Malibu 10 29 116 295 3 453
Manhattan Beach 9 20 22 173 0 224
Mar Vista - City of LA 557 935 505 1,800 179 3,976
Marina Del Rey CDP* 2 3 2 48 0 55
Maywood-Vernon 2,009 3,127 2,123 4,300 403 11,962
Mission Hills - City of LA 240 360 425 877 211 2,113
Monrovia 812 1,753 1,131 2,273 125 6,094
Montebello 1,668 2,573 2,154 4,664 603 11,662
Monterey Park 432 1,007 693 1,812 426 4,370
Mt. Washington - City of LA 561 1,089 933 2,105 260 4,948
North Hills - City of LA 1,338 1,865 1,133 3,133 129 7,598
North Hollywood - City of LA 3,644 5,328 3,484 9,495 624 22,575
Northridge - City of LA 704 1,076 383 1,248 39 3,450
Norwalk 1,299 2,345 2,041 4,541 748 10,974
Oakwood - City of LA 599 1,201 884 2,061 149 4,894
Pacific Palisades - City of LA 3 32 23 166 1 225
Pacoima - City of LA 3,164 4,987 4,157 8,236 735 21,279
Palmdale 881 2,539 1,527 2,336 199 7,482
Palms - City of LA 468 685 473 1,676 78 3,380
Palos Verdes 39 126 139 326 18 648
Panorama City - City of LA 1,846 2,460 1,880 4,735 528 11,449
Paramount 1,547 3,178 1,896 3,425 116 10,162
Pasadena 2,032 3,165 2,606 6,648 470 14,921
Pearblossom - Uninc. 18 46 25 16 2 107
Pico Rivera 1,276 2,372 2,164 4,520 983 11,315
Pico Union - City of LA 2,616 4,233 1,639 5,546 301 14,335
Pomona 4,221 7,905 4,447 9,482 646 26,701
Porter Ranch - City of LA 0 0 8 46 0 54
Redondo Beach 288 472 284 795 64 1,903
Reseda - City of LA 922 1,507 999 3,011 161 6,600
Latino Profile Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.13 LATINOS BELOW POVERTY LEVEL BY AGE BY COMMUNITY, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1997
Persons
Community 0-4 5-14 15-24 25-64 65+ Total
Rosemead 1,106 2,624 1,628 3,190 466 9,014
Rowland Heights CDP* 227 361 362 872 78 1,900
San Dimas 110 262 251 404 0 1,027
San Fernando 836 2,130 1,117 2,109 242 6,434
San Gabriel 390 692 602 1,377 229 3,290
San Marino 0 5 6 33 6 50
San Pedro - City of LA 1,301 2,586 1,899 4,043 402 10,231
Santa Clarita 362 568 418 1,106 63 2,517
Santa Fe Springs 294 677 550 940 236 2,697
Santa Monica 343 559 569 1,742 251 3,464
Sherman Oaks - City of LA 16 47 24 230 12 329
Sierra Madre 0 0 12 77 8 97
Signal Hills 51 92 61 226 20 450
Silverlake - City of LA 302 574 527 1,495 250 3,148
South Central - City of LA 5,807 9,698 6,356 13,570 722 36,153
South El Monte 1,123 2,391 1,425 2,807 271 8,017
South Gate 3,342 5,773 4,339 8,572 814 22,840
South Park - City of LA 7,101 11,647 5,551 12,107 688 37,094
South Pasadena 35 98 80 217 25 455
South San Gabriel CDP* 80 204 138 277 32 731
South Whittier-La Habra CDP* 954 1,935 1,351 2,610 302 7,152
Studio City - City of LA 68 147 80 395 25 715
Sun Valley - City of LA 1,295 2,435 1,686 3,811 277 9,504
Sunland - City of LA 113 347 285 520 32 1,297
Sylmar - City of LA 1,306 1,926 1,929 3,734 358 9,253
Temple City 55 102 106 268 64 595
Torrance 281 458 387 1,099 135 2,360
Tujunga - City of LA 303 408 350 939 20 2,020
Valencia 0 0 4 28 0 32
Valencia - Uninc. 0 0 0 15 0 15
Latino Profile Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.13 LATINOS BELOW POVERTY LEVEL BY AGE BY COMMUNITY, Cont.
Los Angeles County, 1997
Persons
Community 0-4 5-14 15-24 25-64 65+ Total
Valyermo - Uninc. 0 0 13 66 0 79
Van Nuys - City of LA 5,073 6,166 3,894 11,330 330 26,793
Venice - City of LA 331 509 310 862 97 2,109
Veterans Admin. 0 0 0 39 24 63
View Park CDP* 0 0 1 9 1 11
Walnut 22 90 136 349 51 648
Walnut Park CDP* 530 788 569 1,245 195 3,327
Watts - City of LA 2,816 4,732 3,311 6,344 342 17,545
West Covina 1,006 2,032 1,723 3,886 376 9,023
West Hollywood 31 67 53 481 74 706
West LA - City of LA 144 187 177 2,982 92 3,582
West Wilshire - City of LA 8 32 33 360 33 466
Westchester - City of LA 134 173 149 794 51 1,301
Westlake - City of LA 895 1,024 698 2,480 139 5,236
Westlake Village - LA 2 6 21 94 1 124
Whittier 1,196 1,572 1,327 3,224 167 7,486
Wholesale - City of LA 624 1,379 1,316 3,743 127 7,189
Willowbrook CDP* 1,321 2,050 1,332 2,423 162 7,288
Wilmington 2,012 3,497 2,452 5,160 455 13,576
Wilshire - City of LA 2,097 2,075 1,292 6,174 328 11,966
Wilshire-Pico - City of LA 1,328 2,180 1,620 4,854 302 10,284
Woodland Hills - City of LA 17 66 43 235 2 363
LA County Total 180,175 301,802 203,638 481,014 39,902 1,206,531
Source: Los Angeles County Chief Administrative Office, Urban Research Division, 1997 poverty estimate.
Communities in this table are cities, sections of cities , and incorporated areas recognized by Census Bureau as
distinct communities (CDP - Census Designated Place). Communities are defined on the basis of census tracts.
Latino Profile Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.14 POVERTY AND CITIZENSHIP STATUS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1998-1999 Average
Race/Ethnic
Below Poverty
Level
Persons
100% to 124% of
poverty level
125% to 149% of
poverty level
150% and higher of
poverty level
Group* Frequency Total % Number % Number % Number % Number
Latino
U.S. Born Citizen 2,246,042 100.0 680,999 7.6 170,792 7.7 172,012 54.4 1,222,239
Foreign Born Naturalized Citizen 394,911 100.0 75,345 6.9 27,340 7.0 27,777 67.0 264,449
Not U.S. Citizen 1,759,707 100.0 627,337 10.4 182,327 10.5 184,038 43.5 766,005
Total 4,400,660 100.0 1,383,681 8.6 380,459 8.7 383,827 51.2 2,252,693
African American
U.S. Born Citizen 804,432 100.0 207,438 5.0 39,847 4.6 37,044 64.7 520,103
Foreign Born Naturalized Citizen 13,310 100.0 6,684 0.0 0 0.0 0 49.8 6,626
Not U.S. Citizen 14,899 100.0 4,313 14.1 2,104 0.0 0 56.9 8,482
Total 832,641 100.0 218,435 5.0 41,951 4.4 37,044 64.3 535,211
Asian
White
U.S. Born Citizen 378,290 100.0 77,473 2.8 10,438 3.7 14,169 73.0 276,210
Foreign Born Naturalized Citizen 384,912 100.0 39,933 2.9 10,985 4.5 17,224 82.3 316,770
Not U.S. Citizen 376,856 100.0 58,928 7.3 27,372 4.4 16,571 72.7 273,985
Total 1,140,058 100.0 176,334 4.3 48,795 4.2 47,964 76.0 866,965
U.S. Born Citizen 3,181,426 100.0 202,103 3.0 96,605 2.4 75,247 88.2 2,807,471
Foreign Born Naturalized Citizen 225,243 100.0 18,737 4.1 9,196 5.6 12,683 82.0 184,627
Not U.S. Citizen 249,537 100.0 43,128 12.3 30,684 4.1 10,307 66.3 165,418
Total 3,656,206 100.0 263,968 3.7 136,485 2.7 98,237 86.4 3,157,516
Total
U.S. Born Citizen 6,610,190 100.0 1,168,013 4.8 317,682 4.5 298,472 73.0 4,826,023
Foreign Born Naturalized Citizen 1,018,376 100.0 140,699 4.7 47,521 5.7 57,684 75.9 772,472
Not U.S. Citizen 2,400,999 100.0 733,706 10.1 242,487 8.8 210,916 50.6 1,213,890
Total Persons 10,029,565 100.0 2,042,418 6.1 607,690 5.7 567,072 67.9 6,812,385
Note: Does not include American Indian or Other categories because small numbers make results unreliable.
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement: 1998-1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.15 POVERTY BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1970-1998
Persons Below Povery Level
1970 1980 1990 1998
% of % of % of % of % of % of % of % of
Race/Ethnic Group Group Total Poor Group Total Poor Group Total Poor Group Total Poor
Latino 14.7 24.9 20.5 42.6 22.9 56.9 32.6 68.0
African American 24.0 23.9 23.1 21.6 21.2 15.5 22.3 9.0
American Indian n/a n/a 17.0 0.9 17.1 0.1 17.5 0.4
Asian Pacific n/a n/a 12.8 5.9 13.2 9.5 15.8 8.8
White 8.1 51.2 9.9 50.1 7.1 19.0 9.5 13.8
Total 10.9 100.0 13.4 100.0 15.1 100.0 22.1 100.0
Poverty Population 752,554 984,816 1,308,255 2,151,876
*For 1970 and 1980 Race and Latino ethnicity overlap since Latinos may be of any race. The total is unduplicated.
1990 and 1998 show Non-Hispanic White.
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1970, 1980, 1997, 1998
U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, March 1998
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.16 PUBLIC ASSISTANCE RECIPIENT CHARACTERISTICS: ETHNICITY, CITIZENSHIP AND LANGUAGE
Los Angeles County, January 1999
Persons Aided
Food In-Home
CalWORKS General Medi-Cal Stamps Support
Ethnicity Total One-parent Two-parent Relief Only Only Services
Hispanic 876,425 300,414 90,076 19,626 385,294 60,388 20,627
Asian 128,280 31,283 24,659 5,181 56,178 3,385 7,594
Black 299,475 179,340 6,712 38,656 27,104 26,175 21,488
White 246,705 66,463 38,750 16,462 76,149 15,370 33,511
Other 2,715 917 180 410 832 241 135
Total 1,553,600 578,417 160,377 80,335 545,557 105,559 83,355
Citizenship Status
Citizens 1,147,160 531,723 112,787 64,559 344,388 93,753 na
Legal immigrants 212,863 46,694 47,590 15,776 90,997 11,806 na
Undocumented immigrants 110,222 0 0 0 110,222 0 na
Total 1,470,245 578,417 160,377 80,335 545,557 105,559 na
Primary Language
Spanish 602,225 155,722 67,498 6,947 316,809 40,764 14,485
Armenian 49,496 6,741 21,391 3,160 7,028 542 10,634
Asian Languages 75,885 21,532 20,230 3,465 24,596 1,347 4,715
English 800,785 391,977 46,627 65,296 190,786 62,122 43,977
Farsi 5,277 484 1,442 306 1,194 133 1,718
Russian 11,008 943 2,288 845 868 467 5,597
Other 8,924 1,018 901 316 4,276 184 2,229
Total 951,375 422,695 92,879 73,388 228,748 64,795 68,870
Source: Department of Public Social Services.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles

Table 3.17 PUBLIC ASSISTANCE RECIPIENTS, LATINO AND NON-LATINO
Los Angeles County, January 1998 - September 1999
Persons Aided
Percent Change
January 1998 January 1999 September 1999 Jan 1998 - Sept. 1999
Type of Assistance Latino Non-Latino* Latino Non-Latino* Latino Non-Latino* Latino Non-Latino*
CalWORKS (Families with Children)
One Parent 300,414 278,003 269,022 249,292 250,730 227,503 -17% -18%
Two Parent 90,076 70,301 79,489 63,418 74,712 57,654 -17% -18%
Total CalWORKS 390,490 348,304 348,511 312,710 325,442 285,157 -17% -18%
General Relief 19,626 60,709 13,930 44,972 15,180 47,569 -23% -22%
Cash Assistance Program n/a n/a n/a n/a 312 4,117 n/a n/a
for Immigrants (CAPI)
Medi-Cal Only 385,294 160,263 400,940 170,067 561,969 270,077 46% 69%
Food Stamps Only 60,338 45,171 60,913 41,604 62,182 40,003 3% -11%
In-Home Supportive 20,627 62,728 22,120 67,266 23,472 71,379 14% 14%
Services
Total 876,425 677,175 846,414 636,619 988,557 718,302 13% 6%
Source: Department of Public Social Services.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.18 HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1998
Income
Total
Persons*
African
American % Asian % White % Latino %
Less than $25,000 4,547,352 486,585 54.7 450,449 40.0 958,693 26.4 2,651,625 59.0
$25,000-$49,999 2,556,098 186,217 20.9 280,396 24.9 844,040 23.2 1,245,445 27.7
$50,000-$74,999 1,358,560 146,144 16.4 173,506 15.4 677,344 18.6 361,566 8.0
$75,000+ 1,684,211 70,847 8.0 222,835 19.8 1,155,275 31.8 235,254 5.2
Total 10,146,221 889,793 100.0 1,127,186 100.0 3,635,352 100.0 4,493,890 100.0
*Note: Does not include American Indian or Other categories because small numbers make results unreliable.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement: 1998
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.19 FAMILY INCOME BY ETHNIC GROUP IN QUARTILES**
Los Angeles County, 1999
Race/Ethnic Group*
No
% Total
Persons in Families
Lowest Second
Quarter Quarter
Third
Quarter
Highest
Quarter
Latino No. 4,307,429 1,286,971 1,556,620 873,884 589,954
Row % 100.0 29.9 36.1 20.3 13.7
Col % 43.5 57.3 60.5 39.4 20.5
African American No. 775,491 250,215 167,595 172,208 185,473
Row % 100.0 32.3 21.6 22.2 23.9
Col % 7.8 11.1 6.5 7.8 6.4
Asian No. 1,152,929 248,673 223,865 283,334 397,057
Row % 100.0 21.6 19.4 24.6 34.4
Col % 11.6 11.1 8.7 12.8 13.8
White No. 3,677,053 459,099 624,671 888,112 1,705,171
Row % 100.1 12.5 17.0 24.2 46.4
Col % 37.1 20.5 24.3 40.0 59.3
Total No. 9,912,902 2,244,958 2,572,751 2,217,538 2,877,655
Row % 100.0 22.6 26.0 22.4 29.0
Col % 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement: 1999
*Note: Does not include American Indian or Other categories because small numbers make results unreliable.
**Each quartile represents 1/4 of the income distribution. Both row and column percentages are shown. For example,
the row percentages show that of the total Latino population, 29.9% are in the lowest quarter of incomes, 36.1% are in
the second quarter of incomes, 20.3% are in the 3rd quarter and 13.7% are in the highest quarter.

Table 3.20 SAVINGS OR INVESTMENTS FOR HOUSEHOLDS WITH INCOME OF $25,000 OR MORE
Los Angeles County, 1995
Households
Total Non-Latinos Latinos
Amount of Savings or Investments Total Owners % Renters % Owners % Renters % Owners % Renters %
Income of $25,000 or more
No savings or investments 927,800 171,800 23.3 756,000 39.0 103,200 19.8 396,400 35.9 68,600 32.0 359,600 43.0
$25,000 or less 228,100 90,300 12.3 137,800 7.1 65,900 12.6 99,100 9.0 24,400 11.4 38,700 4.6
More than $25,000 55,500 42,500 5.8 13,000 0.7 37,500 7.2 12,000 1.1 5,000 2.3 1,000 0.1
Not reported 126,800 63,400 8.6 63,400 3.3 54,100 10.4 44,500 4.0 9,300 4.3 18,900 2.3
Income of $25,000 or less 1,338,300 368,000 50.0 970,300 50.0 260,700 50.0 552,000 50.0 107,300 50.0 418,300 50.0
Total 2,676,500 736,000 100.0 1,940,500 100.0 521,400 100.0 1,104,000 100.0 214,600 100.0 836,500 100.0
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Housing Survey, Los Angeles-Long Beach Metropolitan Area, 1995.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.21 HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990
Households
County African American Asian White
Income Total* % American % Indian % Pacific % Non-Hispanic % Latino %
Less than $5,000 142,450 4.8 29,225 8.3 846 5.6 16,474 5.9 56,701 3.6 40,393 5.2
$5,000 - $9,999 240,610 8.0 47,584 13.6 1,484 9.9 16,432 5.9 107,660 6.8 69,058 8.9
$10,000 - $14,999 225,368 7.5 32,649 9.3 1,300 8.7 18,678 6.7 96,225 6.0 78,055 10.1
$15,000 - $24,999 455,030 15.2 60,556 17.3 2,490 16.6 36,029 13.0 198,773 12.5 160,493 20.8
$25,000 - $34,999 434,946 14.5 52,059 14.8 2,357 15.7 36,143 13.0 210,735 13.2 136,090 17.6
$35,000 - $49,999 518,283 17.3 53,390 15.2 2,761 18.4 49,310 17.8 278,616 17.5 136,602 17.7
$50,000 - $74,999 519,060 17.3 47,947 13.7 2,386 15.9 56,001 20.2 311,793 19.6 103,214 13.4
$75,000 - $99,999 223,273 7.5 16,709 4.8 823 5.5 25,592 9.2 150,498 9.4 30,092 3.9
$100,000 - or more 235,323 7.9 10,604 3.0 565 3.8 22,779 8.2 183,555 11.5 18,286 2.4
Total households 2,994,343 100.0 350,723 100.0 15,012 100.0 277,438 100.0 1,594,556 100.0 772,283 100.0
Median household
income $34,965 $25,827 $30,933 $39,296 $41,222 $27,361
Per capita income $16,149 $12,018 $12,986 $14,584 $24,938 $8,066
* Race and Latino ethnicity overlap since Latinos may be of any race, except for White Non-Hispanic. The total is unduplicated.
No more recent data available.
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.22 PER CAPITA INCOME BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1980-1990
Race/Ethnic Groups
Dollars
1980 1990* 1980-1990
Percent of
Percent of
County Per
County Per Change in Percent of
Capital
Dollars Capital County Per Capita
Latino $4,627 55.7% $8,066 49.9% -10.4%
African American $5,714 68.8% $12,018 74.4% +8.1%
American Indian $6,570 79.1% $12,986 80.4% +1.6%
Asian Pacific $7,654 92.2% $14,584 90.3% -2.1%
White $9,560 ** 115.1% $24,938 154.4% +34.1%
Los Angeles County $8,303 $16,149 100.0%
* No more recent data available.
** White in 1980 includes Hispanic, while 1990 is Non-Hispanic White. This accounts for part of the increase in White income, since
the 1980 figure is skewed downward by the lower incomes of Hispanic Whites.
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1980, 1990.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.23 RATIO OF FAMILY INCOME TO POVERTY LEVEL BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1998-1999 Average
Persons
Latino
Families Persons Persons Persons
1970 1980 1990 1998-99
Below 1.00 12.8% 20.5% 22.9% 31.4%
1.00 - 1.99 26.1% 28.6% n/a n/a
2.00 or more 61.1% 50.9% n/a n/a
Median Family Income $18,938 $15,531 $26,791 n/a
Black
Below 1.00 20.4% 23.1% 21.2% 26.2%
1.00 - 1.99 25.5% 29.2% n/a n/a
2.00 or more 54.1% 47.7% n/a n/a
Median Family Income $7,573 $14,879 $29,774 n/a
White
Below 1.00 n/a 9.9% 7.1%
1.00 - 1.99 n/a 63.3% n/a n/a
2.00 or more n/a 26.8% n/a n/a
Median Family Income n/a $23,217 $51,580 n/a
Total
Below 1.00 8.2% 13.4% 15.1%
1.00 - 1.99 35.9% 53.5% 50.0% n/a
2.00 or more 55.9% 33.1% 34.9% n/a
Median Family Income $10,972 $21,125 $39,035 n/a
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement:
1998-1999.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.24 HOME OWNERSHIP BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990-1998
Percent of Housing Units Owner-Occupied
African
Year Total* White American Asian Pacific
Latino
1990 48.1 56.6 36.5 51.3 35.1
1993 48.2 56.6 36.4 51.4 34.8
1994 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
1995 50.0 67.6 45.0 52.0 36.4
1996 48.6 65.8 45.1 48.3 34.0
1997 50.9 66.5 51.1 57.1 34.4
1998 50.1 67.4 42.4 60.0 35.0
*Note: Does not include American Indian or Other categories because small numbers
make results unreliable".
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1990, U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey,
March Supplement: 1993, 1995-1998.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.25 FHA LOANS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1990-1999
Number of Loans
Year Total* White Black American Indian Asian Hispanic
1990 18,707 10,851 1,607 46 502 3,846
1991 16,478 10,003 1,430 38 486 4,114
1992 16,056 10,122 1,344 51 392 3,813
1993 26,859 17,655 2,081 128 758 6,178
1994 40,362 23,976 3,384 142 1,211 11,566
1995 23,807 10,146 2,621 137 678 10,165
1996 34,455 13,779 3,364 138 972 15,825
1997 34,481 13,058 3,007 171 921 16,744
1998 62,512 19,996 6,147 222 2,176 31,206
1999 63,655 21,300 6,505 188 2,189 30,073
Amount of Loans
Volume
1990 $1,576,726,303 $842,405,635 $127,554,198 $4,117,655 $47,515,608 $391,637,423
1991 $1,501,958,658 $811,566,639 $128,772,817 $3,733,532 $50,941,981 $465,598,416
1992 $1,461,515,826 $825,809,599 $122,117,941 $4,596,746 $39,127,520 $435,296,377
1993 $2,504,584,739 $1,498,197,187 $196,287,231 $12,198,140 $78,874,215 $714,761,988
1994 $3,908,517,690 $2,051,082,584 $329,816,745 $13,522,031 $128,014,714 $1,378,850,227
1995 $2,519,524,661 $926,171,044 $265,457,302 $12,147,866 $77,241,282 $1,232,192,791
1996 $3,762,476,118 $1,314,421,426 $360,418,902 $12,227,001 $110,977,853 $1,960,145,606
1997 $3,957,402,217 $1,329,842,589 $330,501,685 $15,737,267 $109,908,860 $2,102,137,726
1998 $7,516,932,989 $2,122,962,281 $697,911,175 $25,607,500 $277,613,425 $4,047,750,094
1999 $8,083,766,465 $2,436,866,170 $786,011,932 $22,811,856 $302,522,860 $4,110,922,634
Average Loan
1990 $84,285 $77,634 $79,374 $89,514 $94,653 $101,830
1999 $126,993 $114,407 $120,832 $121,340 $138,201 $136,698
*Includes unknown and other ethnicity.
Source: Federal Housing Administration, The Santa Ana Homeownership Center.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.26 HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
Los Angeles County, 1995
Housing Units
Characteristics of Housing Units Total Percent Latino Occupied Percent
Total occupied housing units 2,947,500 100.0% 906,100 100.0%
Owner occupied 1,375,200 46.7% 315,300 34.8%
Renter occupied 1,572,200 53.3% 590,800 65.2%
Units with telephone 2,693,600 798,600 88.1%
Vehicle availability
None 317,100 10.8% 118,400 7.3%
One 1,996,100 67.7% 658,800 25.2%
Two or more 1,272,200 43.2% 372,600 67.5%
Persons per room
1.00 or less 2,602,500 88.3% 642,400 70.9%
1.01 - 1.50 238,200 8.1% 175,100 19.3%
1.51 or more 106,700 3.6% 88,500 9.8%
Plumbing facilities
Complete plumbing 2,913,700 98.9% 900,100 100.0%
Owner occupied 1,359,600 46.1% 313,200 34.8%
Renter occupied 1,554,100 52.7% 586,800 65.2%
Lacking complete plumbing
Owner occupied
n/a
Renter occupied 4,900 0.2% 1,900 0.2%
Source: U.S. Census of Population, American Housing Survey, 1995.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.27 HOUSING QUALITY INDICATORS, LATINO OCCUPIED UNITS
Los Angeles County, 1995
Total Occupied Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
Characteristics Units % Units % Units %
Total Units 906,100 100.0% 315,300 100.0% 590,800 100.0%
Severe physical problems 17,100 1.9% 5,100 1.6% 12,000 2.0%
Plumbing 6,000 0.7% 2,100 0.7% 3,900 0.7%
Heating 7,100 0.8% 3,100 1.0% 4,000 0.7%
Electric 2,000 0.2% 0 0.0% 2,000 0.3%
Upkeep 3,000 0.3% 0 0.0% 3,000 0.5%
Hallways 1,000 0.1% 0 0.0% 1,000 0.2%
Units without severe problems 889,000 98.1% 310,200 98.4% 578,800 98.0%
Overall Opinion of Structure
(residents rating on scale of 1-10)
1-2(worst) 20,900 2.3% 3,100 0.3% 17,800 2.0%
3-4 19,200 2.1% 2,000 0.2% 17,200 1.9%
5-6 162,400 17.9% 24,300 2.7% 138,100 15.2%
7-8 363,100 40.1% 115,700 12.8% 247,400 27.3%
9-10(best) 333,700 36.8% 169,200 18.7% 164,600 18.2%
Total 899,300 100.0% 314,300 34.9% 585,100 65.1%
Overall Opinion of Neighborhood
(residents rating on a scale of 1-10)
1-2(worst) 29,200 3.2% 5,200 0.6% 24,000 2.6%
3-4 53,900 5.9% 11,000 1.2% 26,100 2.9%
5-6 177,400 19.6% 29,400 3.2% 147,900 16.3%
7-8 317,400 35.0% 123,000 13.6% 194,400 21.5%
9-10(best) 320,100 35.3% 144,600 16.0% 175,500 19.4%
Total 898,000 100.0% 313,200 34.9% 567,900 63.2%
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Housing Survey, 1995.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 3.28 HOUSING COSTS
Los Angeles County, 1995
Housing Units
Total Percent Latino Occupied Percent
Owner Occupied Units 1,375,200 906,100 65.9%
Median value - owner occupied units $638 $1,019
Monthly owner costs
Under $400 377,000 27.4% 71,700 22.7%
$400-599 133,000 9.7% 32,300 10.2%
$600-799 107,900 7.8% 22,900 7.3%
$800-999 97,100 7.1% 25,900 8.2%
$1,000-1,499 297,200 21.6% 107,800 34.2%
$1,500-1,999 362,900 26.4% 54,700 17.3%
Total units 1,375,100 100.0% 315,300 100.0%
Median $943 $1,019
Monthly owner costs as percent of income
0-19% 570,300 44.5% 87,700 27.8%
20-24% 156,400 12.2% 33,300 10.6%
25-29% 131,500 10.3% 28,800 9.1%
30-34% 95,200 7.4% 29,300 9.3%
35%+ 327,900 25.6% 131,000 41.6%
Zero or negative income 0 0.0% 5,100 1.6%
Total units 1,281,300 100.0% 315,200 100.0%
Renter Occupied Units 1,572,200 590,800 43.0%
Median gross rent ( in 1990 dollars) $654 $597
Monthly housing costs
Under $300 99,700 6.3% 3,800 0.7%
$300-449 154,500 9.8% 70,100 12.6%
$450-599 351,900 22.4% 185,500 33.3%
$600-699 285,200 18.1% 114,900 20.6%
$700-799 202,600 12.9% 67,000 12.0%
$800-999 226,900 14.4% 72,300 13.0%
$1,000 or more 201,300 12.8% 29,800 5.4%
No cash rent 50,200 3.2% 13,100 2.4%
Total units 1,572,300 100.0% 556,500 100.0%
Rent as percent of income
0-19% 232,200 14.8% 68,300 11.8%
20-24% 175,400 11.2% 63,600 11.0%
25-29% 183,600 11.7% 65,000 11.2%
30-34% 134,600 8.6% 62,100 10.7%
35%+ 646,500 41.1% 311,000 53.8%
Zero or negative income 199,900 12.7% 7,900 1.4%
Total units 1,572,200 100.0% 577,900 100.0%
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Housing Survey, 1995.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

LIFE-LONG LEARNING

LIFE-LONG LEARNING: Key Findings
One of the conclusions following discussion at the Action Agenda Conference was that in
addition to education, key skills for success in Los Angeles of the 21 st Century will be fluency
in English, Spanish, computers and cross-cultural interaction. In this section covers statistical
data about education, computer use and intergroup relations.
EDUCATION
Public Education in Los Angeles County
•= 1,617,000 children were enrolled in the county’s 94 independent school districts for the 1998-
99 school year. (Table 4.02)
•=
•=
57% of the students in public schools are Latinos. Whites are the second largest group of
students at 20%, followed by African Americans at 12%, Asians at 11% and American
Indians, less than 1%. (Table 4.02)
19% of public school teachers in 1998-99 are Latinos. This rate has been rising very slowly,
with an increase of 1% per year.
Language Trends
The proportion of non-English speaking students has gradually risen to 35% of all public school
students in the county, a total of 568,000 Limited English Proficient students in 1998-99. (Table
4.04)
RISING ENROLLMENT OF NON-ENGLISH SPEAKING
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
1983-84
1986-87
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1

•=
Spanish is the home language of 88% of all limited-English students in 1998-99. The
percentage of Spanish language students who are fluent in English increases from 12% of
kindergartners to 69% of 12th grade students. (Table 4.05).
Educational Background of Adults
•=
8% of Latino adults have completed college (Bachelor’s degree or higher), 16% have had
some college, 22% are high school graduates, 25% attended 7-12th grade, and 28% have 6
years of education or less according to the 1999 Current Population Survey data. 37% of
non-Latinos graduated from college, 31% attended some college and 23% have a high school
diploma. (Table 4.10)
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Adult Education Level 1999
0-6 yrs. 7-11 yrs. H.S. grad Some
college
College
grad
Latino
Non-Latino
•=
The level of education for Latino adults (age 25 and over) has increased since 1990: the
percentage with less than high school graduation fell from 61% to 54%, high school
graduates rose from 17% to 23%, and the percentage who had attended college increased
from 22% to 24%. (Table 4.10 and 4.11)
High School Graduation Trends
•=
50% of Latinos graduated with their high school class in 1998. The Latino graduation rate has
remained slightly above 50% for the past ten years.
•= 1998 non-Latino graduation rates were 53% for African Americans, 93% for Asians and 73%
for Whites. Changes in graduation requirements caused the 1998 graduation rate to decline
slightly for most groups. (Table 4.06)
2

Latino High School Graduation Rate
Percent
100
80
60
40
20
0
1998 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
•= There has been a substantial increase in high school students preparing to enter college: 40%
of graduates in 1996-97 had taken the courses required for entrance to University of
California or the California State University system, up from 28% a decade ago. As with
graduation rates, Asians have the highest college preparation rate at 67%, with lowest rates
for American Indians and Latinos lowest at 28% and 30% respectively. (Table 4.07)
College Attendance
•=
•=
•=
•=
The Latino college going rate (percent of graduates who enter college the following fall) for
California Public colleges has fluctuated around 40% for the past ten years. For all L.A.
County graduates the rate of entering public colleges or universities was 48% in 1998.
(Table 4.08)
150,008 Latinos were enrolled at public and private colleges and universities in L.A. County
in 1997. 3% attended UCLA, 17% were at California State University branches, 72% were in
community colleges and 7% attended private colleges. Altogether, Latinos were 32% of
students in all colleges and universities located in L.A. County in 1997. (Table 4.09)
College graduation rates by race/ethnic group are currently not available due to difficulties in
tracking students who enter from various sources or who may have transferred from one
campus to another.
Latinos were 32% of all 1997 graduates from California State University campuses in L.A.
County in 1997.
3

COMPUTER USE
•=
Since there is no uniform source of information available on computer ownership, estimates
rely on sample surveys to assess the level of home computer use. Two sources cited below
give different results, although both show a similar pattern.
•=
•=
24% of Latinos in L.A. County are in households that have a home computer, based
on 1998 Current Population Survey sample data. 36% of African Americans, 60% of
Asians and 61% of Whites have access to a computer at home. The overall rate of
computer ownership in the CPS sample was 43%) (Table 4.16)
A higher rate of computer ownership was identified in a statewide survey by the
Public Policy Institute of California in September 1999. In that survey, the overall
rate of computer ownership for adults was 63% and for Latinos is was 40%. (The rate
in this survey is different from the CPS in that it applies to adults only, which may
result in a higher ownership rate. )
•=
•=
Use of the Internet at home is much less common than home computer ownership. CPS data
show that 6% of Latinos are in homes with Internet access, compared to 33% of Whites, 14%
of African Americans and 20% of Asians. (Table 4.18)
Access to computers at school was quite common for all ethnic groups: 51% of Latino
parents say their children use computers at school, compared to 56% of African American,
60% of Asian and 65% of White parents according to the CPS. (Table 4.17)
INTERGROUP RELATIONS
Intermarriage and Multiracial/Ethnic Births
•=
•=
In California, Mexican-Americans have historically had a high rate of intermarriage with
other ethnic groups. In her chapter on Mexican Americans in Ethnic Los Angeles, Vilma
Ortiz notes that during the ‘sixties 40% of Mexican Americans married outside their group
and the intermarriage rate increased to about 50% by the mid-‘seventies.
Heavy immigration during the ‘seventies and ‘eighties, with many new arrivals already
married and the tendency of recent migrants to marry within their group, resulted in a sharp
decline in the intermarriage rate. By 1990, 85% of Mexican-origin women in the Los
Angeles area were married to Mexican-origin men, with higher rates for foreign born and
lower rates for U.S. born, especially for younger women. Ortiz notes that due to the very
large pool of potential marriage partners it is likely that intermarriage may slow in future
years.
4

•= Multiracial/ethnic births were 10% of all births in L.A. County in 1997. A January 2000
report from the Public Policy Institute of California shows that while multiracial/ethnic births
to U.S. born mothers in California increased from 14% in 1982 to 21% in 1997, births to
immigrant mothers were primarily within the same ethnic group and have remained at about
8% since 1982. Since more than half of births in L.A. County are to foreign born women, the
rate of mixed births in this area has remained lower than in other parts of the state which have
smaller immigrant populations.
Residential Segregation
•=
Paradoxically, growth in number of Latino residents throughout many areas of the county has
not resulted in a decline of segregation (in the sense of concentration of ethnic groups in
specific geographic areas). The great increase in immigration during the ‘70s and ‘80s
increased the density of Latino populations, resulting in less contact with Whites and more
contact with other Latinos in day-to-day interactions, as documented by Vilma Ortiz in
Ethnic Los Angeles (Waldinger and Bozorgmehr, 1966).
Hate Crime
•=
Hate crime incidents are reported annually by the L.A. County Human Relations
Commission. Their reports since 1990 show:
•=
•=
•=
•=
The level of reported hate crimes in which Latinos were the victims has fluctuated
sporadically between 12% and 23% of incidents in a given year. No upward or
downward trend is identifiable. (Table 4.12)
Hate crimes reported in which perpetrators were Latinos have ranged from 19% to
35%, with no clear pattern identifiable. In 76 of 113 incidents in which Latinos were
perpetrators in 1998 the victims were African Americans. (Table 4.13)
In 90 hate crime incidents in 1998 in which Latinos were victims, the most frequent
perpetrators were African Americans (38 incidents) and Whites (21). (Table 4.13)
In hate crimes involving sexual orientation 28% of incidents involved Latinos as
perpetrators in 1998. (Table 4.14)
5

LATINO INTERNET RESOURCES
This short bibliography of Internet websites offers a sampling of the ‘Latino’ and Spanish language Internet
resources in Southern California and Worldwide. A small sampling of sites to launch an exploration of
the Latino Internet was also included. This list is not intended to be exhaustive and inclusion or exclusion
in the site is not a reflection of the quality or lack of quality of any specific website.
Latinos and the Internet
http://latino.sscnet.ucla.edu/research/latinos.html
Building Chicana/o Latina/o Communities through the Internet
http://latino.sscnet.ucla.edu/
California Latina/Latino Demographic Data Book
http://ucdata.berkeley.edu/latino.book.html
National Latino Research Center (NLRC, at San Diego)
http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/dept/nlrc/index.html
Chicano Studies Research Center (at UCLA)
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/csrc/
National Association for Chicana/Chicano Studies (NACCS)
http://cehd.ewu.edu/cehd/faculty/cmaldonado/home.html
CSRC Chicano Links
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/csrc/links.html
Center for the Study of Books in Spanish for Children and Adolescents (CSBS)
http://www.csusm.edu/campus_centers/csb/
InterUniversity Program for Latino Research
http://clnet.ucr.edu/iup.html
Hispanic Research Center -- Arizona State University
http://clnet.ucr.edu/research/hrc.html
Southwest Hispanic Research Institute -- University of New Mexico
http://clnet.ucr.edu/research/shri.html
Stanford Center for Chicano Research
http://www.stanford.edu/group/SCCR/
Center for Mexican American Studies
http://www.utexas.edu/ftp/pub/cmas/
Cuban Research Institute
http://lacc.fiu.edu/cri/index.html
CENTRO The Center for Puerto Rican Studies
http://myst.hunter.cuny.edu/centro/general/mission.html
Mauricio Gastón Institute for Latino Community Development & Public Policy
http://clnet.ucr.edu/research/gaston.html
Latino Profiles Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Latino Coalition for a Healthy California
http://www.lchc.org/
NALEO Educational Fund
http://www.naleo.org/
REFORMA -- THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION TO PROMOTE LIBRARY SERVICES TO THE
SPANISH SPEAKING
http://clnet.ucr.edu/library/reforma/
Frontera
http://www.fronteramag.com/
LatinoWeb
http://www.latinoweb.com/
Organizaciones Latinas
http://www.fundsnetservices.com/latorg.htm
Latino Professional Network
http://www.lpn.org/
Cesar E. Chavez Science Magnet School
http://www.kern.com/~debbie/
Cesar E. Chavez (1927 - 1993)
http://www.kern.com/~debbie/index2.html
Latino E-Zines and Directory Sites
San Jose Living: Other Locations (Cesar Chavez Plaza in San Jose)
http://www.acoates.com/Miscellaneous.html#Location:43
In the Footsteps of Cesar Chavez
http://web.syr.edu/~thefci/schavez.htm
UCLA Chicano Studies Research Library
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/csrc/library/
The Center for Mexican American Studies
http://www.utexas.edu/ftp/depts/cmas/index.html
CMAS Books
http://www.utexas.edu/ftp/depts/cmas/cmasbooks/index.html
Inter-University Program for Latino Research IUPLR
http://www.utexas.edu/ftp/depts/cmas/projects.html
Latino USA
http://www.latinousa.org/
Latino Link Homepage
http://www.latinolink.com/index.html
Latino Profiles Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Fiera (Spanish Language Internet Search Engine)
http://www.fiera.com/
MexMaster.com (Mexican Search Engine)
http://www.mexmaster.com/
Ole! (Spanish Language Search Engine)
http://www.ole.es/
Ozu (Spanish Language Search Engine)
http://www.ozu.com/
CiberCentro (Latin American Countries online index site)
http://www.cibercentro.com/
Subasta.com (Internet Auction for Latin American Products)
http://www.subasta.com/?ref=trovator
Directorio Global Net
http://www.dirglobal.net/
Elcano
http://www.elcano.com/
Intercom (site in Spain)
http://www.intercom.es/
Donde (online directory in Spain)
http://donde.uji.es/
Red Iris (Spain’s Academic-Research Network)
http://www.rediris.es/
Sololibros.com (Spanish Language Book Seller)
http://www.sololibros.com/ozu/secs.cgi
Bilingual Search Engines Page
http://www.hispanicbiz.com/search.htm
HispanicBiz (Business Web Site)
http://www.hispanicbiz.com/
Infoweek Spanish edition
http://www.infoweek.cl/
Magazi Net
http://www.sintesis.cl/magazine/numero0/revista0.htm
América Económica Internacional (Economic Latin American Publication)
http://www.americaeconomica.net/
It has links to the following publications:
El Boletin (Spanish Publication - economic news magazine)
http://fondosweb.tsai.es/fondosweb/boletin.htm
Latino Profiles Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/csrc/
Latina(o) Leadership Opportunity Program
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/csrc/llop.htm
Instituto Cervantes
http://www.users.interport.net/~cervante/wem4.html
Hispanic Reading Room
http://lcweb.loc.gov/rr/hispanic/
Latino Resources at the Smithsonian
http://www.si.edu/resource/tours/latino/start.htm
Chicano Studies Collection at Berkley
http://eslibrary.berkeley.edu/cslhome.html
Cesar E. Chavez Collection at Michigan State University
http://www.lib.msu.edu/coll/main/chavez/
Chicano Studies Research Library at UCLA
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/csrc/library/
Mecha de UCLA
http://students.asucla.ucla.edu/mecha/homepage.htm
Latin American Studies (at UT)
http://lanic.utexas.edu/las.html
Latino Web
http://www.latinoweb.com/index.html
Office of Minority Health Resource Center
http://www.omhrc.gov/frames.htm
Ole!
http://www.ole.es/
California Latina/Latino Demographic Data Book
http://ucdata.berkeley.edu/latino.book.html
Latinos and the Internet
http://latino.sscnet.ucla.edu/research/latinos.html
Other Internet Sites
Internet Engines
Latino Profiles Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Chicano Studies
National Latino Research Center (NLRC, at San Diego)
http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/dept/nlrc/index.html
Chicano Studies Research Center (at UCLA)
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/csrc/
National Association for Chicana/Chicano Studies (NACCS)
http://cehd.ewu.edu/cehd/faculty/cmaldonado/home.html
CSRC Chicano Links
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/csrc/links.html
Center for the Study of Books in Spanish for Children and Adolescents (CSBS)
http://www.csusm.edu/campus_centers/csb/
InterUniversity Program for Latino Research
http://clnet.ucr.edu/iup.html
Hispanic Research Center -- Arizona State University
http://clnet.ucr.edu/research/hrc.html
Southwest Hispanic Research Institute -- University of New Mexico
http://clnet.ucr.edu/research/shri.html
Stanford Center for Chicano Research
http://www.stanford.edu/group/SCCR/
Center for Mexican American Studies
http://www.utexas.edu/ftp/pub/cmas/
Cuban Research Institute
http://lacc.fiu.edu/cri/index.html
CENTRO The Center for Puerto Rican Studies
http://myst.hunter.cuny.edu/centro/general/mission.html
Mauricio Gastón Institute for Latino Community Development & Public Policy
http://clnet.ucr.edu/research/gaston.html
Latino Coalition for a Healthy California
http://www.lchc.org/
NALEO Educational Fund
http://www.naleo.org/
REFORMA -- THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION TO PROMOTE LIBRARY SERVICES TO THE
SPANISH SPEAKING
http://clnet.ucr.edu/library/reforma/
Latino Profiles Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Newspapers
Los Angeles Times
http://www.latimes.com/
La Opinion
http://www.laopinion.com/
Latino Profiles Study Report
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.01 TEACHERS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1982-1998
Teachers
Race/Ethnic Group 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Hispanic 8% 9% 9% 10% 11% n/a 12% 13% 14% 15% 17% 18% 19%
Black 14% 13% 13% 13% 13% n/a 13% 12% 12% 12% 11% 11% 11%
American Indian 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% n/a 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
Asian* 6% 6% 6% 6% 7% n/a 7% 7% 7% 7% 8% 8% 8%
White 72% 71% 71% 70% 69% n/a 68% 67% 66% 65% 64% 62% 60%
Total % Certificated 100 100 100 100 100 n/a 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
*Includes Asian, Filipino and Pacific Islander.
Note: n/a = not available. Certificated staff data were not collected in 1991. Data for certificated staff only: does not include administrators or teachers without Teacher's
Certificate, such as instructional aides.
Source: California Basic Educational Data System. http://www.cde.ca.gov
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.02 PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENT BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1970-1998
Enrollment*
1970-71 1979-80* 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99
Race/Ethnic Group % % % % % % % % % % %
Latino 19.1 35.0 51.8 52.7 53.3 54.2 54.8 55.5 56.4 57.1 57.7
African American 15.0 16.9 12.3 12.1 12.1 12.1 12.1 12.1 11.9 11.8 11.7
American Indian 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
Asian Pacific** 2.9 6.2 10.7 10.8 11.0 11.0 10.9 10.7 10.6 10.5 10.4
White 62.8 41.5 24.9 24.1 23.3 22.5 21.9 21.4 20.8 20.3 19.8
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Number 1,465,895 1,227,063 1,406,718 1,441,228 1,455,867 1,465,597 1,473,717 1,508,589 1,549,833 1,583,283 1,617,764
*Starting with 1998-99 enrollment includes California Youth Authority schools.
** 1979-80. No ethnic census in 1980-81.
*** Includes Asian, Pacific Islander, Filipino and other Non-White
Source: Los Angeles County Office of Education, California Department of Education
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.03 PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENT TRENDS
Los Angeles County, 1985-1998
Private Schools
Public Schools
School Year School Enrollment
Percent of children in
private schools Schools Enrollment
1985-86 1,251 207,069 13.9 1,661 1,281,937
1986-87 1,267 206,474 13.6 1,670 1,308,154
1987-88 1,271 205,401 13.5 1,603 1,316,054
1988-89 1,320 204,731 13.3 1,618 1,333,445
1989-90 1,335 201,964 12.9 1,642 1,366,568
1990-91 1,394 206,448 12.9 1,651 1,406,718
1991-92 1,553 209,319 12.7 1,660 1,441,228
1992-93 1,447 211,147 12.7 1,665 1,455,867
1993-94 1,470 212,954 12.7 1,678 1,465,597
1994-95 1,481 215,112 12.8 1,678 1,473,717
1995-96 1,543 216,842 12.6 1,677 1,508,589
1996-97 1,685 218,758 12.4 1,692 1,549,833
1997-98 1,641 217,689 12.1 1,719 1,583,283
1998-99 1,337 217,911 12.3 1,743 1,617,764
Source: Los Angeles County Office of Education
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.04 LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Los Angeles County, 1984-1998
Students
Language Group 1983-84 1986-87 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99*
Spanish 186,378 234,013 321,866 363,368 392,368 414,762 435,163 449,773 466,359 484,442 491,037 499,511
Asian Pacific Languages 29,825 35,286 43,560 49,330 52,725 53,896 54,528 52,965** 51,543 50,417 48,722 47,059
European and Other Languages 11,640 13,201 19,490 20,983 23,901 25,201 25,230 76,659 23,140 22,781 21,471 21,321
Total Non-English Proficient 227,843 282,500 384,916 433,681 468,994 493,859 514,921 526,432 541,042 557,640 561,230 567,981
Percent Non-English Proficient 18.4% 21.6% 27.4% 30.1% 32.2% 33.7% 34.9% 34.9% 35.7% 36.0% 35.5% 35.1%
Total Students 1,240,950 1,316,054 1,406,718 1,441,228 1,455,867 1,465,597 1,473,717 1,508,589 1,508,589 1,549,833 1,583,283 1,617,764
Language proficiency is based on a test given to students whose parents stated when the child was first enrolled that a language other than English was spoken at home.
Data not available for 1984-85, 1985-86.
*Starting with 1998-99 enrollment includes California Youth Authority schools.
**Asian languages includes minor Asian Pacific language groups at same level as 1993-94.
Source: Los Angeles County Office of Education, California Dept. of Education .

Table 4.05 SPANISH SPEAKING STUDENTS BY GRADE LEVEL AND ENGLISH PROFICIENCY
Los Angeles County, 1998-99
Spanish Speaking Students in Public Schools
Fluent English Proficient Limited English Proficienct
Grade Number % Number % Total %
Kindergarten 8,368 12.2 60,129 87.8 68,497 100.0
1st 8,769 12.2 63,363 87.8 72,132 100.0
2nd 8,732 12.4 61,673 87.6 70,405 100.0
3rd 9,915 14.8 57,265 85.2 67,180 100.0
4th 10,776 18.2 48,533 81.8 59,309 100.0
5th 15,459 26.9 41,963 73.1 57,422 100.0
6th 19,953 38.3 32,100 61.7 52,053 100.0
7th 21,650 43.8 27,817 56.2 49,467 100.0
8th 22,015 46.9 24,968 53.1 46,983 100.0
9th 25,672 48.5 27,210 51.5 52,882 100.0
10th 24,288 56.1 18,993 43.9 43,281 100.0
11th 21,759 62.8 12,901 37.2 34,660 100.0
12th 19,688 69.5 8,620 30.5 28,308 100.0
Ungraded 1,267 8.3 13,916 91.7 15,183 100.0
Total 218,311 30.4 499,451 69.6 717,762 100.0
Source: California Department of Education, .
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.06 HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION RATE BY RACE/ETHNICITY
Los Angeles County Public Schools, 1981-1998
Estimated Graduation Rate
African American Asian Pacific Filipino White Hispanic
Class Total American Indian Islander
1981 64%
1982 65%
1983 67%
1984 67%
1985 65%
1986 64%
1987 63%
1988 63%
1989 60% 51% 92% 71% 96% 69% 48%
1990 62% 49% 99% 62% 89% 72% 50%
1991 62% 50% 94% 64% 84% 71% 52%
1992 63% 52% 98% 73% 89% 70% 54%
1993 62% 55% 98% 65% 90% 70% 53%
1994 61% 57% 98% 64% 89% 70% 51%
1995 59% 54% 58% 90% 60% 92% 69% 50%
1996 61% 53% 51% 91% 83% 86% 72% 52%
1997 62% 56% 63% 92% 100% 88% 75% 53%
1998 60% 53% 49% 93% 76% 84% 73% 50%
Actual data tracking the graduation of individual students are not available. This estimate uses graduates as a percent of 9th grade enrollment four years
earlier, e.g. 1997-98 graduates divided by 9th grade enrollment in 1994-95. Data by race/ethnic group not available before 1989.
Source: Los Angeles County Office of Education, California Department of Education .
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.07 HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES WITH U.C.-REQUIRED* COURSES, BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County Public Schools, 1987-1998
Percent of Graduates
Race/Ethnic Group 1986-87 1988-89 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98
Latino 16 22 26 25 24 26 26 30 30 31
African American 22 30 34 35 35 34 41 39 38 36
American Indian 13 29 20 14 13 36 20 26 28 26
Asian 53* 60 61 61 62 60 65 66 67 63
Pacific Islander - 23 46 27 22 38 41 35 50 29
Filipino 40 47 53 49 88 41 41 53 51 48
White 32 34 37 36 38 39 39 45 43 45
Total 28 30 36 35 35 36 36 40 40 40
*Graduates with courses required for University of California or California State University admission.
Source: Los Angeles County Office of Education, California Department of Education .

Table 4.08 COLLEGE GOING RATE BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
California Public Higher Education Campuses in Los Angeles County, 1989-1998
Los Angeles County High School Graduates
Total Black Asians Native American White Latino
Year Grads College Grads College Grads College Grads College Grads College Grads College
1989
Total 64,425 34,140 8,216 4,088 9,671 6,555 148 294 25,098 13,036 21,292 9,016
College going rate 53% 50% 68% 199% 52% 42%
1990
Total 63,442 32,539 7,066 3,812 10,647 6,864 205 203 22,909 10,934 22,615 9,160
College going rate 51% 54% 64% 99% 48% 41%
1991
Total 62,425 32,348 7,029 3,966 10,223 7,256 186 210 20,834 10,159 24,143 9,832
College going rate 52% 56% 71% 113% 49% 41%
1992
Total 65,075 31,856 7,247 3,719 10,792 7,082 205 194 20,131 9,063 26,700 10,853
College going rate 49% 51% 66% 95% 45% 41%
1993
Total 66,900 31,715 7,457 3,612 10,846 7,361 284 223 19,455 8,584 28,858 11,063
College going rate 47% 48% 68% 79% 44% 38%
1994
Total 68,172 32,015 7,776 3,706 11,528 7,438 190 207 19,102 8,164 29,575 11,636
College going rate 47% 48% 65% 109% 43% 39%
1995
Total 67091 34,112 7,357 3,994 11,054 7,716 199 272 18,613 8,577 29,708 12,511
College going rate 51% 54% 70% 137% 46% 42%
1996
Total 67289 34,866 7,357 4,041 10,932 7,665 176 240 18,750 8,652 30,074 12,950
College going rate 52% 55% 70% 136% 46% 43%
1997
Total 69714 34,322 7,987 3,846 11,623 7,695 205 224 18,719 7,846 31,186 13,143
College going rate 49% 48% 66% 109% 42% 42%
1998
Total 72130 34,346 7,784 3,422 12,574 7,865 205 192 18,859 7,980 32,695 13,047
College going rate 48% 44% 63% 94% 42% 40%
*Total includes Other, Non-resident Aliens and no response. American Indian college enrollment in CPEC data is as shown above.
Source: California Postsecondary Educational Commission.
http://www.cpec.ca.gov
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.09 COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY ENROLLMENT BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Campuses in Los Angeles County, 1995-1998
Enrollment
Type of School Total Percent* Black Asian Filipino Nat. Amer. White Other Latino
1995
University of California 32,340 100% 6% 31% 4% 1% 41% 1% 15%
California State University 87,150 100% 10% 19% 5% 1% 37% 3% 26%
California Community Colleges 256,415 100% 14% 12% 4% 1% 31% 2% 36%
Private 81,447 100% 7% 18% 0% 1% 60% 0% 14%
Total Enrollment 457,352 100% 12% 16% 3% 1% 38% 2% 29%
Total in Group 53,130 73,535 15,456 3,670 173,183 7,869 130,509
1996
University of California 32,946 100% 6% 31% 4% 1% 41% 1% 15%
California State University 90,237 100% 11% 18% 5% 1% 35% 3% 27%
California Community Colleges 267,562 100% 14% 12% 4% 1% 30% 2% 37%
Private 78,305 100% 7% 18% 0% 1% 60% 0% 14%
Total Enrollment 469,050 100% 12% 16% 3% 1% 37% 2% 30%
Total in Group 54,300 73,459 16,035 3,788 173,204 8,725 139,539
1997
University of California 32,686 100% 6% 31% 4% 1% 42% 1% 15%
California State University 91,187 100% 11% 18% 5% 1% 34% 3% 29%
California Community Colleges 282,794 100% 14% 12% 4% 1% 28% 3% 38%
Private 63,481 100% 8% 16% 0% 1% 58% 0% 17%
Total Enrollment 470,148 100% 12% 15% 3% 1% 34% 3% 32%
Total in Group 55,644 71,030 16,361 3,875 161,358 11,872 150,008
*Percent of total known ethnicity.
Source: California Postsecondary Education Commission.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.10 ADULT EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT, LATINO AND NON-LATINO
Los Angeles County, 1996-1999
Persons Age 25 and Over
1996 % 1997 % 1998 % 1999 %
K to 6th Grade
Latino 662,162 32.0 698,764 33.5 700,699 30.9 612,808 28.4
Non-Latino 106,976 2.8 96,162 2.4 82,808 2.1 74,243 1.9
7th to 12th Grade
Latino 483,195 23.3 514,386 24.6 597,400 26.3 542,469 25.2
Non-Latino 294,402 7.6 261,166 6.5 276,016 7.2 285,345 7.4
High School Graduate
Latino 491,171 23.7 436,461 20.9 507,391 22.3 485,480 22.5
Non-Latino 938,685 24.3 919,142 22.9 820,293 21.3 874,344 22.6
Some College or AA
Latino 300,289 14.5 288,216 13.8 324,167 14.3 343,717 15.9
Non-Latino 1,121,598 29.1 1,147,441 28.6 1,146,279 29.7 1,186,661 30.6
BA or Higher
Latino 134,306 6.5 151,053 7.2 141,114 6.2 172,122 8.0
Non-Latino 1,395,765 36.2 1,588,798 39.6 1,533,179 39.7 1,453,020 37.5
Total
Latino 2,071,123 100.0 2,088,880 100.0 2,270,770 100.0 2,156,596 100.0
Non-Latino 3,857,426 100.0 4,012,709 100.0 3,858,575 100.0 3,873,612 100.0
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement: 1996-1999 .
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.11 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT OF ADULTS BY RACE/ETHNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1960-1990
African American American Indian Asian Pacific White Latino**
Level of Education
Completed 1960* 1970 1980 1990 1960 1970 1980 1990 1960 1970 1980 1990 1960 1970 1980 1990*** 1960 1970 1980 1990
0-8th grade 34.6 23.9 14.0 7.5 n/a n/a 14.0 10.4 n/a n/a 12.4 12.0 23.2 15.6 14.3 4.2 50.7 38.0 43.3 38.8
9-12 grade, did not 21.6 24.4 17.5 18.7 n/a n/a 19.4 17.4 n/a n/a 7.4 8.3 20.3 17.1 12.5 10.2 22.9 21.1 16.9 22.0
graduate
High school diploma 25.3 30.3 32.3 24.1 n/a n/a 31.4 23.5 n/a n/a 24.1 17.1 56.5* 67.3* 31.7 22.9 17.5 25.2 22.3 17.1
Some college, less 12.1 15.2 25.3 25.5 n/a n/a 23.8 26.2 n/a n/a 21.2 15.9 n/a n/a 21.7 24.0 5.9 10.2 11.9 11.5
than a bachelor's degree
Associate degree n/a n/a n/a 9.4 n/a n/a n/a 9.0 n/a n/a n/a 9.6 n/a n/a n/a 8.1 n/a n/a n/a 4.6
Bachelor's degree 6.4 6.2 10.9 10 n/a n/a 11.4 8.6 n/a n/a 34.9 26.7 n/a n/a 19.9 19.1 3.0 5.5 5.6 4.0
Graduate or professional n/a n/a n/a 4.8 n/a n/a n/a 4.8 n/a n/a n/a 10.5 n/a n/a n/a 11.4 n/a n/a n/a 2.1
degree
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
*Nonwhite in 1960. 78% of Non-White were Black.
**Race and Latino ethnicity overlap since Latinos may be of any race. The total is unduplicated.
***Non-Hispanic, White 1990 only.
Source: U.S. Census of Population, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.12 HATE CRIMES - VICTIMS
Los Angeles County, 1990-1998
Victims
Race 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Latino 12.7 19.1 20.5 16.3 23.3 21.0 15.6 15.5 20.6
African American 52.0 37.1 38.7 42.9 44.0 43.8 54.7 55.8 50.2
Asian Pacific 17.8 15.4 18.4 10.6 8.0 11.8 8.3 6.5 7.6
Middle Eastern 3.6 6.3 1.4 n/a n/a 3.6 3.7 2.2 4.6
White 4.4 13.4 20.3 26.9 23.8 18.1 16.3 18.2 16.5
Other 9.5 6.3 0.7 3.4 0.8 1.8 1.3 1.6 0.5
Total 275 350 434 417 361 448 539 489 436
Perpetrators
Latino 19.4 23.6 22.4 29.0 22.1 25.0 33.5 25.8
African American 17.1 32.7 19.8 21.8 16.1 12.8 13.3 18.2
Asian Pacific n/a 0.6 n/a 0.6 2.2 0.9 1.8 2.3
Middle Eastern 2.3 0.6 n/a 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.2
White 61.2 42.4 22.2 27.9 25.0 31.1 24.7 27.0
Other n/a n/a 35.6 20.4 33.9 29.7 25.6 26.3
Total 129 165 410 362 448 539 489 436
Hate crimes are defined as acts directed against an individual, institution or business expressly because of race, ethnicity, religion,
sexual orientation, gender or disability status.
Source: L.A. County Human Relations Commission.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.13 HATE CRIME VICTIMS: PERPETRATOR CORRELATIONS
Los Angeles County, 1998
Victims
Perpetrators
Total
African
American
Asian
Pacific
Middle
Eastern White Unknown Latino
Latino 113 76 9 5 14 1 8*
African American 79 2 4 1 34 0 38
Asian Pacific 10 3 0 1 2 0 4
Middle Eastern 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
White 118 76 6 7 8* 0 21
Unknown 115 61 14 6 14 1 19
*Most intragroup hate crimes, e.g. Latino on Latino, were triggered by the victims' friendship(s) with persons of other
ethnicities or races.
Source: L.A. County Human Relations Commission.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.14 SEXUAL HATE CRIMES
Los Angeles County, 1998
Victims
Perpetrators Gay Men Lesbian Other Total
Latino 51 12 0 63 27.8%
African American 33 9 3 45 19.9%
Asian Pacific 7 1 0 8 3.5%
Middle Eastern 3 0 0 3 1.3%
White 43 10 1 54 23.9%
Unknown 36 13 4 53 23.0%
Total 173 45 8 226 100.0%
Source: L.A. County Human Relatios Commission.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.15 RELIGIOUS HATE CRIME
Los Angeles County, 1990-1998
Victims
Perpetrators Jewish Christian Other Total
Latino 0 1 0 1 1.0%
African American 3 0 1 4 3.9%
Asian Pacific 0 0 1 1 1.0%
Middle Eastern 1 0 0 1 1.0%
White 25 1 0 26 25.5%
Unknown 57 8 4 69 64.6%
Total 86 10 6 102 100.0
Source: L.A. County Human Relations Commission.
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.16 HOME COMPUTER OWNERSHIP BY RACE/ETNIC GROUP
Los Angeles County, 1998
Persons
Race/Ethnic Group Yes % No %
Latino 1,011,651 24.2% 3,158,070 56.6%
African American 307,976 36.0% 546,326 64.0%
American Indian 15,008 30.0% 34,973 70.0%
Asian 703,058 60.0% 465,701 40.0%
White 2,137,976 60.9% 1,375,218 39.1%
Total 4,175,669 100.0% 5,580,288 100.0%
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement: 1998.
http://www.ferret.bls.census.gov
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.17 CHILDREN'S COMPUTER USE AT SCHOOL
Los Angeles County, 1998
Race Yes % No % Parents with Children
Latino 685,203 51.4% 648,551 48.6% 1,333,754
African American 123,472 56.7% 94,186 43.3% 217,658
Asian 173,203 60.3% 114,220 39.7% 287,423
White 431,025 64.7% 234,832 35.3% 665,857
Total 1,412,903 56.4% 1,091,789 43.6% 2,504,692
Numbers reflect parents with children in school.
* Note: Does not include American Indian or Other categories because small numbers make
result unreliable.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement: 1998
http://www.ferret.bls.census.gov
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

Table 4.18 INTERNET USE AT HOME
Los Angeles County, 1998
Race Total Do not Use Percent
Use Internet at
Home
Percent
Latino 4,353,805 4,109,551 94.4% 244,254 5.6%
White 3,523,212 2,355,238 66.8% 1,167,974 33.2%
Black 890,609 764,910 85.9% 125,699 14.1%
American Indian 51,086 37,020 72.5% 14,066 27.5%
Asian 1,194,227 950,366 79.6% 243,861 20.4%
Total 10,012,939 8,217,085 82.1% 1,795,854 17.9%
Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, Current Population Survey, March Supplement: 1998.
http://ferret.bls.census.gov
Latino Profiles Study Report,
United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 2000

BIBLIOGRAPHY
on
Latinos in Los Angeles County
January 1999

LATINO PROFILES BIBLIOGRAPHY
Armando Garcia, M.P.A.
Doctoral Candidate
U.S.C. School of Public Administration
This bibliography presents an overview of the rich variety of research papers and studies on Latinos in Los
Angeles County. It includes publications since 1990, primarily from academic rather than commercial sources,
in fields such as sociology, economics, education, medicine and political science. While the majority of entries
relate to Latinos in Los Angeles specifically and Southern California in general, it includes a few items of
particular importance which have a Southwest or national scope. The referenced material consists of books,
academic articles, academic papers, monographs, dissertations and various research reports.
The bibliography is divided into the following broad categories:
Arts, Culture and Identity
Crime
Demographics and Research Resources
Economics and Business
Education
Elderly
Employment and Labor
Health and Medicine
Immigration
Information Technology and the Internet
Politics
Poverty, Housing and Welfare Reform
This bibliography is not exhaustive, and we welcome suggested additions. The Access database from which the
bibliography was developed is available for use in the United Way Research Library upon appointment.
1

Arts, Culture and Identity
1 Campoamor, D., W.A. Diaz, and H.A.J. Ramos, Eds. Nuevos Senderos: Reflections on Hispanics
and Philanthropy. Houston, TX:Arte Publico Press, 1999.
2 Delouth, N. B., B. Pirson, and D. Hitchcock. “Gender and Ethnic Role Portrayals - Photographic
Images in Three California Newspapers.” Psychological Reports 76 (1995): 493-494.
3 DeSipio, L. Engaging Television in English y en Espanol. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy
Institute, 1999.
4 DeSipio, L., S. Banet-Weiser, and K. Escalante-Dalton. Talking Back to Television: Latinos
Discuss How Television Portrays Them and the Quality of Programming Options. Claremont, CA:
The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, September 1998.
5 Ethington, P. J., and C. D. West. The Challenge of Intergroup Relations in Los Angeles: An
Historical and Comparative Evaluation of the Los Angeles City Human Relations Commission,
1966-1998. Los Angeles, CA: USC Southern California Studies Center, 1997.
6 Gilbert, L. “Decolonizing the City: The Construction of Social and Spatial Consciousness of
Mexicans in Los Angeles.” MA Thesis, University of California at Los Angeles, 1995.
7 Gonzalez, M. J. “Searching for the Feathered Serpent: Exploring the Origins of Mexican Culture in
Los Angeles, 1830-1850.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Berkeley, 1992.
8 Hurtado, A., D. Hayes-Bautista, R. Valdez Burciaga, and A. Hernandez. Redefining California:
Latino Social Engagement in a Multicultural Society. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Chicano Studies
Research Center, 1992.
9 Johnson, K. R. “Melting-Pot or Ring of Fire: Assimilation and the Mexican-American Experience.”
California Law Review 85 (1997): 1259-1313.
10 LeClerc, G., R. Villa, and M. J. Dear. (editors) Urban Latino Cultures: La Vida Latina in LA.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc., 1999.
11 Leon, J. J., F. Parra, and T. Cheng. “Love-Styles Among Latinos Community-College Students in
Los Angeles.” Psychological Reports 77 (1995): 527-530.
12 Leonard, K. I. Making Ethnic Choices: California’s Punjabi Mexican Americans. Philadelphia, PA:
Temple University Press, 1992.
13 Los Angeles Human Relations Commission. Human Relations in an International City:
Understanding Anti-Immigrant Sentiment in Los Angeles and What Can We Do About It: A Report
of the Human Relations Commission of the City of Los Angeles. Los Angeles, CA: The
Commission, 1996.
14 Marks, M., A. Human Relations 2000: An End of the Millennium Assessment of Human Relations
in Los Angeles Preliminary Draft. Los Angeles, CA: City of Los Angeles Human Relations
Commission, Forthcoming.
15 Monroy, D. Thrown among Strangers: The Making of Mexican Culture in Frontier California.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1990.
16 Nagy, C., and D. J. Woods. “A Note on the Relationship between Acculturation and Socioeconomic
2

Status.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 14 (1992): 248-251
17 Pizarro, M. “The Development and Significance of Racial Consciousness among Chicana/o and
Latina/o High School Youth.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Los Angeles, 1993.
18 Ponce, M. H. Calle Hoyt : Recuerdos de una Juventud Chicana. New York, NY: Anchor Books,
1995.
19 Ponce, M. H. Hoyt Street: An Autobiography. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press,
1993.
20 Portes, A., and L. X. Hao. “E-Pluribus-Unum: Bilingualism and Loss of Language in the Second
Generation.” Sociology of Education 71 (1998): 269-294.
21 Ransford, H. E. Race and Class in American Society : Black, Latino, Anglo. Rochester, Vt.:
Schenkman Books, 1994.
22 Rodríguez, M. Mito, Identidad y Rito : Mexicanos y Chicanos en California. México: CIESAS: M.
A. Porrúa, 1998.
23 Rodriguez, R. Days of Obligation: An Argument with My Mexican Father. New York, NY: Viking,
1992.
24 Rojas, J. T. “The Latino Landscape of East Los Angeles.” NACLA Report on the Americas, 28
(1995): 32-4.
25 Rumbaut, R. Achievement and Ambition among Children of Immigrants in Southern California:
Working Paper No. 215. Annandale-on-the Hudson, NY: Jerome Levy Economics Institute of Bard
College, 1997
26 Salgado de Snyder, N. Interethnic Marriages of Mexican Americans after Nearly Two Decades.
Los Angeles, CA: Spanish Speaking Mental Health Research Center, 1982.
27 Sanchez, A. A. “Mexican and Jewish-American Students: Attitudes and Interaction.” Ph.D. diss.,
University of California at Los Angeles, 1997.
28 Sanchez, G. J. Becoming Mexican American: Ethnicity, Culture, and Identity in Chicano Los
Angeles, 1900-1945. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1993.
29 Sánchez, R. Telling Identities: The California Testimonios. Minneapolis, Minn.: University of
Minnesota Press, 1995.
30 Shaull, S. L., and J. H. Gramann. “The Effect of Cultural Assimilation on the Importance of Family-
Related and Nature-Related Recreation among Hispanic Americans” Journal of Leisure Research, 30
(1998): 47-63.
31 Suro, R. “Mixed Doubles.” American Demographics (November 1999): 57-62.
32 Stiles, M. C., and J. I. Grieshop. “Impacts of Culture on Driver Knowledge and Safety Device Usage
Among Hispanic Farm Workers.” Accident Analysis and Prevention 31 (May 1999): 235-241.
33 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Does English-Language TV News Stereotype Latino? Latinos
Talk Back to TV: Policy Note. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1999.
34 Tucker, M. B., and C. Mitchellkernan. “Social Structural and Psychological Correlates of Interethnic
Dating.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 12 (1995): 341-361.
3

35 Villaseñor, V. Rain of Gold. Houston, TX: Arte Publico Press, 1991.
36 Virgil, J. D. From Indians to Chicanos: The Dynamics of Mexican American Culture 2 nd Edition.
Prospect Heights, Ill.: Waveland Press, 1998.
37 Waldinger, R., and M. Bozorgmehr. Ethnic Los Angeles. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation,
1996.
38 Williams, C. D., J. F. Sallis, and K. J. Calfas. “Psychosocial and demographic correlates of
television viewing.” American Journal of Health Promotion 13 (1999): 207-214.
39 Youmans, M. N. “Communicative Rights and Responsibilities in an East Los Angeles Barrio: An
Analysis of Epistemic Modal Use.” Ph.D. diss., University of Southern California, 1995.
Crime
1 Appel, R. W. “Why Adolescent Latinos in Los Angeles Join and Remain in Gangs.” Thesis
(M.S.W.), California State University at Long Beach, 1993.
2 Barnes, C. W., and R. Kingsnorth. “Race, Drug, and Criminal Sentencing: Hidden Effects of the
Criminal Law.” Journal of Criminal Justice 24(1): 39-55.
3 Becker. H. K., S. Clark, and C. Cruz. Community Policing: Successful Partnerships in the Prevention
of Crime in Latino Communities. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, November
1998.
4 Fremon, C. Father Greg and the Homeboys: The Extraordinary Journey of Father Greg Boyle and his
Work with the Latino Gangs of East L.A. New York, NY: Hyperion, 1995.
5 Gilrivas, V., M. D. Anglin, and J. J. Annon. “Patterns of Drug-Use and Criminal Activities among
Latino Arrestees in California: Treatment and Policy Implications.” Journal of Psychopathology and
Behavioral Assessment 19 (1997): 161-174.
6 Harris, M. G. Cholas: Latino Girls and Gangs. New York, NY: AMS Press, 1988.
7 Moore, J. Going Down to the Barrio: Homeboys and Homegirls in Change. Philadelphia, PA:
Temple University Press, 1991.
8 Phillips, S. “The Material Culture of Chicano Gangs.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Los
Angeles, 1994.
9 Prendegast, M. L., Y. I. Hser, and V. Gilrivs. “Ethnic-Differences in Longitudinal Patterns and
Consequences of Narcotics Addiction.” Journal of Drug Issues 28 (1998): 495-515.
10 Rodriguez, R. Justice: A Question of Race. Tempe, AZ: Bilingual Press/Editorial Bilingue, 1997.
Motta, J. O. “A Preliminary Investigation on the Formation of Chicano Gangs in the Barrios of
Northeastern Los Angeles.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Los Angeles, 1993.
11 Simon, T. R., A. W. Stacy, S. Sussman, and C. W. Dent. “Sensation Seeking and Drug-Use among
High Risk Latino and Anglo Adolescents.” Personality and Individual Differences 17 (1994): 665-
672.
4

12 Sorenson, S. B. “Gender, Ethnicity, and Sexual Assault: Findings from a Los Angeles Study.” The
Journal of Social Issues 48, (1992): 93-104.
13 Trostle, L. The Stoners: Drugs, Demons, and Delinquency. New York, NY: Garland, 1992.
14 Vega, W. A., E. Alderete, and B. Kolody. “Illicit drug use among Mexicans and Mexican Americans
in California: The Effects of Gender and Acculturation.” Addiction 93 (1998): 1839-1850.
15 Vigil, J. D. Understanding Life in an East Los Angeles Public Housing Project: A Focus on Gang and
Non Gang Families: Working Paper Volume VI 1996-1997. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for the
Study of Urban Poverty, 1996.
Demographics and Research Resources
1 Allen, J. P., and E. Turner. The Ethnic Quilt: Population Diversity in Southern California.
Northridge, CA: The Center for Geographical Studies, Department of Geography, California State
Unit verity, Northridge, 1997.
2 Baldassare, M. PPIC Statewide Survey, January 1999 San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of
California, 1999.
3 Baldassare, M. PPIC Statewide Survey, September 1999 San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute
of California, 1999.
4 Chabran, R., and R. Chabran. “The Spanish-Language and Latino Press of the United States:
Newspapers and Periodicals.” In Handbook of Hispanic Cultures in the United States: Literature and
Art. ed. R. Chabran, and R. Chabran, Houston, TX: Arte Publico Press, 1993.
5 Chabran, R., and R. Chabran. The Latino Encyclopedia (6 volumes). New York, NY: Marshall
Cavendish, 1996.
6 Chabran, R., L. Castillo-Speed, and F. Garcia-Ayvens. The Chicano Index (volumes 1 and 2).
Berkeley, CA: Chicano Studies Library, 1991, 1992.
7 DeSipio, L., H. Pachon, and R. Gold. America’s Newest Voices: Colombians, Dominicans,
Guatemalans and Salvadorans in the United States Examine Their Public Policy. Claremont, CA: The
Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1998.
8 Estrada, L. “Latinos in California’s Future.” California Journal, 26: 45+
9 Fernandez, E. W. Using Analytic Techniques to Evaluate the 1990 Census Coverage of Young
Hispanics. Washington, DC: Population Division US Bureau of the Census, May 1999.
10 Gey, F. California Latina/Latino Demographic Data Book. Berkeley, CA: California Policy Seminar,
1993.
11 Hayes-Bautista, D., W. Schink, and G. Rodriguez. Latino Immigrants in Los Angeles: A Portrait from
the 1990 Census. Los Angeles, CA: Alta California Policy Research Center, 1994.
12 Hughes, J. W., and J. J. Seneca. America’s Demographic Tapestry: Baseline for the New
Millennium. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1999.
13 Mogull, R. G. “The Incidence of California Poverty by Population Segment” Social Science Journal
5

35 (1998): 627-634.
14 NALEO Educational Fund/Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Constructing the Los Angeles Area Latino
Mosaic: A Demographic Portrait of Guatemalans and Salvadorans in Los Angeles. Los Angeles, CA:
NALEO Educational Fund/Tomas Rivera Policy Institute 1997.
15 Navarro, A., and E. Lazarin. The People of California: An Atlas of Latino Communities. Claremont,
CA: The Rose Institute of State and Local Government Claremont McKenna College, 1991.
16 Perkins, C. Evaluating the Passel-Word Spanish Surname List: 1990 Decennial Census Post
Enumeration Survey Results. Washington, DC: Population Division US Bureau of the Census, 1993.
17 Population Division US Bureau of the Census. Findings on Questions on Race and Hispanic Origin
Tested in the 1996 National Content Survey. Washington, DC: Population Division US Bureau of the
Census, 1996.
18 Rodriguez, G. “The Next Italians (Latinos in California).” The Economist 341: 28+.
19 Rose Institute of State and Local Government The Demographics of California’s Latinos: Maps and
Statistics. Claremont, CA: The Rose Institute of State and Local Government, Claremont McKenna
College, 1988.
20 Rose Institute of State and Local Government. California’s Latinos, 1988: An Opinion Survey.
Claremont, CA: The Rose Institute of State and Local Government, Claremont McKenna College,
1988.
21 Santillan, R. California’s Latinos: A Research Bibliography. Claremont, CA: The Rose Institute of
State and Local Government, Claremont McKenna College, 1988.
22 Schick, F. L., and R. Schick. Statistical Handbook on U.S. Hispanics. Phoenix, AR: Oryx Press,
1991.
23 Sorenson, S. B. “Identifying Hispanics in Existing Databases - Effect of 3 Methods on Mortality
Patterns of Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Whites.” Evaluation Review 22 (1998): 520-534.
24 The Latino Coalition for a New Los Angeles. Latinos and the Future of Los Angeles: A Guide to the
Twenty-First Century. The Latino Coalition for a New Los Angeles, 1993.
25 The National Council of La Raza. Untapped Potential: A Look at Hispanic Women in the U.S.
Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1996.
26 The Rose Institute of State and Local Government. A Guide to Latino-Owned Businesses in Los
Angeles. Claremont, CA: The Rose Institute of State and Local Government, Claremont McKenna
College, 1988.
27 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Constructing the Los Angeles Area Latino Mosaic: A
Demographic Portrait of Guatemalans and Salvadorans in Los Angeles. Claremont, CA: NALEO
Educational Fund/The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1997.
28 Word, D. L., C. Perkins Jr. Building a Spanish Surname List for the 1990’s—A New Approach to an
Old Problem. Washington, DC: Population Division US Bureau of the Census, 1996.
Economics and Business
1 Alvarez, R. M., Jr. “Mexican Entrepreneurs and Markets in the City of Los Angeles: A Case Study of
6

an Immigrant Enclave.” Urban Anthropology and Studies of Cultural Systems and World Economic
Development, 19 (1990): 99-124.
2 Bolin, R., and L. Stanford. “The Northridge Earthquake - Community - Based Approaches to Unmet
Recovery Needs.” Disasters 22 (1998): 21-38.
3 Burgos, E. D., and L. Sosa. Debate Series 2 issue: Free Trade. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera
Policy Institute, 1993.
4 Chapa, J. The Economy of the Urban Ethnic Enclave. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy
Institute, 1991.
5 Chavez, B. “Viable Economic Development Strategies for Latinas’ Economic Empowerment: An
Economic Development Model Assessment for New Economics for Women.” Ph.D. diss., University
of California at Los Angeles, 1993.
6 Chinchilla, N. Central American Enterprises in Los Angeles. Austin, TX: IUP/SSRC Committee for
Public Policy Research on Contemporary Hispanic Issues, Center for Mexican Studies University of
Texas at Austin, 1989.
7 Forsyth, E. R., J. Solis, and E. Walker. At the Crossroads of Poverty and Affluence: A Latino Agenda
for Orange County. The Orange County Latino Assessment Study (OCLAS). Full Report.
Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1990.
8 Forsyth, E.R. At the Crossroads of Poverty and Affluence: A Latino Funding Agenda for Orange
County. The Orange County Latino Assessment Study (OCLAS) Summary Report. Claremont, CA:
The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1990.
9 Gonzales, A. “Mexican Enclaves and the Price of Culture.” Journal of Urban Economics 43 (1998):
273-291.
10 Guarnizo, L. E. The Mexican Ethnic Economy of Los Angeles: Capitalist Accumulation, Class
Restructuring, and the Transnationalization of Migration; California Communities Program: Working
Paper No. 1. Davis, CA: Department of Human and Community Development, University of California
at Davis, 1997.
11 Hayes-Bautista, D. E. “Latino Business Dynamics: A 1998 Portrait.” Los Angeles Latin Business
Association Reports 25 March 1999, 82-92.
12 Light, I. Immigration and Entrepreneurship: Culture, Capital, and Ethnic Networks. New Brunswick,
NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1993.
13 Lopez, E., E. Ramirez, and R. I. Rochin. Latinos and Economic Development in California.
Sacramento, CA: California Research Bureau, 1999.
14 Lopez-Aquires, Waldo. Business Traits, Market Characteristics, and Employment Patterns of Large
Latino-Owned Firms in Southern California. Los Angeles, CA: Latin Business Association Institute,
1999.
15 Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation. Importance of the Hispanic Market to the Los
Angeles Five-County Market. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation,
1997.
16 Marquez, B. “Mexican-American Community Development Corporations and the Limits of Directed
7

Capitalism.” Economic Development Quarterly 7 (1993): 287-295.
17 Morales, R., and F. Bonilla. “The Illusion of Progress: Latinos in Los Angeles.” In Latinos in a
Changing US Economy: Comparative Perspectives on Growing. ed. Morales R. and Bonilla F., 55-84.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1993.
18 Morales, R., and P. M. Ong. Latinos in a Changing Economy: Comparative Perspectives on Growing
Inequality. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1993.
19 Moreno, M. H. “The Economic and Demographic Effects of Immigration in Los Angeles County: A
Sociology and Public Policy Analysis” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Los Angeles, 1997.
20 Myers, D. Illusions of Downward Mobility in an Immigrant Gateway Community. Los Angeles, CA:
School of Policy, Planning, and Development, University of Southern California, 1998.
21 Pastor, M. Latinos and the Los Angeles Uprising: The Economic Context (Project Update).
Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1993.
22 Peñaloza, L. N. “Atravesando Fronteras/Border Crossings: An Ethnographic Exploration of the
Consumer Acculturation of Mexican Immigrants.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Irvine, 1990.
23 Rochin, R. I., and P. Soberanis. Middle-Class Squeeze. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy
Institute, 1992.
24 Romo, R. The Free Trade Agreement: Mexican American Perspectives. Claremont, CA: The Tomas
Rivera Policy Institute, 1991.
25 Sepulveda, D. A. The Trade Debate and the North American Development Bank (NadBank).
Washington, DC: National Council of La Raza, 1998.
26 Smith, J. E. “A Comparative Study of Entrepreneurial Strategies among Afro-American and Latino
Truckers in the Los Angeles and Long Beach.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Los Angeles,
1994.
27 Swaminathan, S. The Road Less Traveled: Roadblocks to the Implementation of NAFTA Trucking
Provisions in the United States. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1997.
28 The National Council of La Raza. Burden or Relief? The Impact of Taxes on Hispanic Working
Families. Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1997.
29 The National Council of La Raza. The Decade of the Hispanic: An Economic Retrospective.
Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1990.
30 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Mexico’s Financial Crisis: The Impact of the Peso Devaluation on
Latino Communities in the U.S. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1995.
31 Lopez-Aqueres, Waldo. Business Traits, Market Characteristics, and Employment Patterns of Large
Latino-Owned Firms in Southern California. Los Angeles, CA: Latin Business Association, 1999.
Education
1 Appel, M. Alternative Certification: A Practical Alternative for Prospective Minority Teachers?
Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1995.
8

2 Calderon, M. Preparing Teachers and Administrators to Serve the Needs of Latino Students. Princeton,
NJ: ETS Policy Information Center, Educational Testing Service, 1997.
3 Cameron, C. D. “How the Garcia Cousins Lost Their Accents: Understanding the language of Title-VII
Decisions Approving English-Only Rules as the Product of Racial Dualism, Latino Invisibility, and
Legal Indeterminacy.” California Law Review 85 (1997): 1347-1393.
4 Castro, R. E. Glimpses of Innovation: Efforts to Increase Chicano/Latino Teachers in the Southwest.
Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1991.
5 Castro, R. E., and Y. Rodriguez-Ingle. Learning Communities in Teacher Education Programs: Four
Success Stories. Claremont, California: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1993.
6 Castro, R. E., and Y. Rodriguez-Ingle. Reshaping Teacher Education in the Southwest, A Forum: A
Response to the Need of Latino Students and Teachers. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy
Institute, 1993.
7 Castro, R. E., and Y. Rodriguez-Ingle. Resolving a Crisis in Education. Claremont, CA: The Tomas
Rivera Policy Institute, 1993.
8 Chapa, J., and R. Valencia. “Latino Population Growth, Demographic Characteristics, and Educational
Stagnation: An Examination of Recent Trends.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Science 15 (1993):
165-187
9 Chapa, J. Mexican American Education, First, Second and Third Generation Adaptations: Current
Issues in Educational Research Workshop. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Graduate School of
Education, 1996.
10 Darder, A., Y. R. Ingle, and B. G. Cox. The Policies and the Promise: The Public Schooling of Latino
Children. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1993.
11 De Cas, P. L. Educating California’s Immigrant Children An Overview of Bilingual Education.
Sacramento, CA: California Research Bureau, 1999.
12 Durado, J., and T. Trujillo. Debate Series 1 Issue: School Choice. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera
Policy Institute, 1992.
13 Duran, R. P., F. Escoba, M. Watkin. Improving Classroom Instruction for Latino Elementary School
Students: Aiming for College. Princeton, NJ: ETS Policy Information Center, Educational Testing
Service, The 1996 ETS Invitational Conference on Latino Education Issues: Conference Proceedings,
1997.
14 Ellickson, P., K. Bui, R. Bell, and K. A. McGuigan. “Does Early Drug-use Increase the Risk of
Dropping out of High-School.” Journal of Drug Issues 28 (1998): 357-380.
15 Fajardo, R. California School District Administrators Speak to Proposition 187. Claremont, CA: The
Tomás Rivera Policy Institute Survey, 1994.
16 Goldenberg, C., and R. Gilmore. “Immigrant Latinos Parents’ Values and Beliefs About Their
Children’s Education: Continuities and Discontinuities Across Cultures and Generations.” Advances in
Motivation and Achievement 9 (1995): 183-228.
17 Greene, J. P. A Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Bilingual Education. Claremont, CA: The
Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1998.
9

18 Greene, J. P. Bilingual Education: The Case for Science Over Politics. Claremont, CA: The Tomas
Rivera Policy Institute, 1998.
19 Gutierrez, H. J. “The Chicano Education Rights Movement and School Desegregation, Los Angeles,
1962-1970.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Los Angeles, 1990.
20 Hampton, S., J. M. Ekboir, and R. I. Rochin. “The Performance of Latinos in Rural Public Schools: A
Comparative Analysis of Test Scores in Grade 3, Grade 6, and Grade 12.” Hispanic Journal of
Behavioral Sciences 17 (1995): 480-498.
21 Hayes-Bautista, D., W. Schink, and M. Hayes-Bautista. “Educational Diversity in the Inner City:
Latino and Black Education Attainment of Southern Central Los Angeles.” Journal of the Association
of Mexican American Educators, (1994).
22 Hertzberg, M. “Having Arrived: Dimensions of Educational Success in a Transitional Newcomer
School.” Anthropology & Education Quarterly 29 (1998): 391-418.
23 Hurtado, A., and E. E. Garcia. “Students’ Pathways to Higher Education: Policy Lessons Learned
from the Latino Eligibility Study.” In The 1996 ETS Invitational Conference on Latino Education
Issues: Conference Proceedings, 1996, Princeton, NJ: ETS Policy Information Center, Educational
Testing Service, 1997.
24 Hurtado, M. T. “The Influence of Parents and Siblings on Late Adolescents’ Academic Achievement
and College Attendance.” Ph. D. diss., University of California at Riverside, 1997.
25 Inda, J. J. La Comunidad en Lucha: The Development of the East Los Angeles High School Blowouts.
Stanford, CA: Stanford Research Center for Chicano Research, 1990.
26 Kwiatkowski, M. Alternative Teacher Certification: Delivering on the Promises, Proceedings from a
National Conference. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1999.
27 Kwiatkowski, M. Debating Alternative Teacher Certification: A Trial by Achievement. Claremont,
CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1998.
28 Leary, M. E. “Diversity in Higher Education.” California Journal 26 (1995): 31+
29 Lopez, M. L., and E. Romero-Gwynn. “Building Educational Partnerships to Serve Latinos in Central
California.” Journal of Family and Consumer Science 89 (1997): pp. 16+
30 MacGillivray, L. Your Paycheck is Your Report Card: Inner City Parents’ Beliefs About Literacy. Los
Angeles, CA: USC, Southern California Studies Center, 1997
31 Macias, R. F. “Language and Ethnic Classification of Language Minorities - Chicano and Latino
Students in the 1990s.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 15 (1993): 230-257.
32 MacMillan, D. L., F. M. Gresham, and K. M. Bocian. “Curing Mental-Retardation and Causing
Learning Disabilities Consequences of Using Various Wisc-III IQS to estimate aptitude of Hispanic
Students.” Journal of Psychoeducation Assessment 16 (1998): 36-54.
33 Mejia, A. Will The University of California Prepare the Next Generation of Minority Doctors and
Lawyers? Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1998.
10

34 Mejia, A., Hispanic and Black Acceptance Rates and Enrollment Drop in Wake of UC Elimination of
“Preferences” Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute Research Associate, 1999.
35 Monsivasis, G. I. Latino Teachers: Well Educated but Not Prepared. Claremont, CA: The Tomas
Rivera Policy Institute, 1990.
36 Rodriguez-Ingle, Y Southwest Teacher Network: A Network of Innovative Programs Designed to
Enhance the Supply and Preparation of Latino Teachers. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy
Institute, 1991.
37 Rodriguez-Ingle, Y. Southwest Teacher. Future Latino Teachers Learning in a Cooperative
Environment. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1991.
38 Rodriguez-Ingle, Y., L. Magaña, and R. F. Macias. The Education of Teachers: A Bibliography.
Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1992.
39 Sage Publications, Inc. “Economic, Labor Force, and Social Implications of Latino Education and
Population Trends” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 15 (1993).
40 San Miguel, G., and R. R. Valencia. “From the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo to Hopwood - The
Educational Plight and Struggle of Mexican-Americans in the Southwest.” Harvard Educational
Review 68 (1998): 353-412.
41 Solorazno, D. G. “The Baccalaureate Origins of Chicana and Chicano Doctorates in the Social-
Sciences.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 17 (1995): 3-32.
42 Suarez-Orozco, M. Central American Refugees and U.S. High Schools: A Psychological Study of
Motivation and Achievement. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997.
43 The National Council of La Raza. The Forgotten Half: Two-Thirds: An Hispanic Perspective on
Apprenticeship, European Style. Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1993.
44 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Latino Participation in California Higher Education
System. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1992.
45 Trueba, H. T. “Rethinking Dropouts: Culture and Literacy for Minority Empowerment.” in What Do
Anthropologists Have to Say about Dropouts?, ed. New York, NY: The Falmer Press, 1989.
46 US Department of Labor. College Enrollment and Work Activity of 1995 High School Graduates.
Washington, DC: US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Census Bureau, 1996.
47 Valencia, R. Latinos and Education: An Overview of Sociodemographic Characteristics and School
Conditions. Princeton, NJ: ETS Policy Information Center, Educational Testing Service, 1997.
48 Valenzuela, A. Subtractive Schooling: U.S. - Mexican Youth and the Politics of Caring (Draft) New
York, NY: State University of New York Press, 1999.
49 Vernez, G., R. Krop, and C. P. Rydell. Closing the Education Gap: Benefits and Costs. Santa Monica,
California: RAND Corporation, 1999.
50 Vigil, J. D. Personas Mexicanas: Chicano High Schoolers in a Changing Los Angeles. Fort Worth,
TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1997.
51 Welsh, M., R. D. Parker, and S. Wang. “A longitudinal Assessment of the Academic Correlates of
Early Peer Acceptance and Rejection.” Journal of Clinical Child Psychology 26 (1997): 290-303.
11

Elderly
1 Aleman, S. Hispanic Elders and Human Services. New York, NY: Garland Publishing, 1997.
2 Asociacion Nacional Pro Personas Mayores (National Association for Hispanic Elderly). A National
Study to Assess the Service Needs of the Hispanic Elderly. Los Angeles, CA: National Association for
Hispanic Elderly, 1980.
3 Asociacion Nacional Pro Personas Mayores (National Association for Hispanic Elderly). A Research,
Bibliographic, and Resource Guide on the Hispanic Elderly. Los Angeles, CA: National Association
for Hispanic Elderly, 1981.
4 Barsa, B. R. N. The Independence of Urban Hispanic Elderly: The Growing Need for Social Support
Networks. New York, NY: Garland Publishing, 1998.
5 Beverly Foundation. Social and Health Service Needs of Hispanic Seniors in the San Gabriel Valley
Under-served Geographic Area. Pasadena, CA: Beverly Foundation, 1990.
6 Brink, T. L. Hispanic Aged Mental Health. New York, NY: Haworth Press, 1992.
7 Delgado, M. Latino Elders and the Twenty-First Century: Issues and Challenges for Culturally
Competent Research and Practice. New York, NY: Haworth Press, 1998.
8 Halloran, E. W. “Understanding the Service Needs of the Hispanic Elderly in the Inglewood ,
California Area.” MS Thesis, University of Southern California, 1992.
9 Lopez, C., and E. Aquilera. On the Sidelines: Hispanic Elderly and the Continuum of Care.
Washington, DC: Policy Analysis Center and Office of Institutional Development National Council of
La Raza, 1991.
10 Markides, K. S., and H. W. Martin. Older Mexican Americans. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera
Policy Institute, 1990.
11 National Council of La Raza. Becoming Involved in the Aging Network: A Planning and Resource
Guide for Hispanic-Based Organizations. Washington, DC: National Council of La Raza, 1991.
Employment and Labor
1 Brack, M. L. “Building and Builders in Hispanic California, 1769-1850.” Journal of the Society of
Architectural Historians 56 (1997): 533-534.
2 Chiswick, B. R. “The Effects of Americanization on the Earnings of Foreign Born Men.” Journal of
Political Economy 85 (1978): 897-921.
3 Falcon, D. California Affirmative Action Sourcebook: Inclusivity and Wage Differentials of
Managers in the State’s Private Sector. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1995.
4 Levan, R., E. R. Brown, and N. Hays. Disparity in Job-Based Health Coverage Places California’s
Latinos at Risk of Being Uninsured. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research,
1999.
5 Mueller, E. J. “Latin American Women Immigrants in Los Angeles: Conflict between Home and
Work Roles and Poverty.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Los Angeles, 1992.
12

6 Myers, D., and C. Cranford. “Temporal Differentiation in the Occupational Mobility of Immigrant
and Native-Born Latina Workers.” American Sociological Review 63, (1998): 68-93.
7 Ong, P. M., and J. R. Lawrence. “Race and Employment Dislocation in California Aerospace
Industry.” Review of Black Political Economy 23 (1995): 91-101.
8 Pulido, L. The Roots of Political Consciousness Among Militant Unionist and Worker Activists in
Los Angeles. Los Angeles, CA: USC Southern California Studies Center, 1998.
9 Soldatenko, M. A. “Organizing Latina Garment Workers in Los Angeles.” Aztlan 20 (1989): 73-96.
10 Soldatenko, M.A. “The Everyday Lives of Latina Garment Workers in Los Angeles: The
Convergence of Gender, Race, Class and Immigration.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Los
Angeles, 1992.
11 Stoll, M. A. “When Jobs Move, Do Black and Latino Men Lose? The Effect of Growth in Job
Decentralization on Young Men’s Jobless Incidence and Duration.” Urban Studies, 35 (1998):
2221+.
12 The National Council of La Raza. Diversity in the Workplace: Barriers and Opportunities from an
Hispanic Perspective. Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1991.
13 The National Council of La Raza. Hispanics in the Labor Force: A Chart Book. Washington, DC:
The National Council of La Raza, 1993.
14 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. The Status of Women and Minorities in California State
Government Employment 1977 to 1992. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1996.
15 US Department of Labor Census Bureau. New Data on Contingent and Alternative Employment
Examined By BLS Washington, DC: US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census
Bureau, 1995.
16 Valenzuela, A. “Immigrants, Minority Workers, and Job Competition: A Comparative Analysis of
New York and Los Angeles, 1970-1980.” Ph.D. diss., Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Department of Urban Studies and Planning, 1995.
17 Valenzuela, A. Jr. Labor Flexibility and Information: Characteristics and Processes of the Immigrant
Day Labor Market: Occasional Working Paper Series 1998-1999. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center
for the Study of Urban Poverty, 1998.
18 Valenzuela, A. Jr. Day Laborers in Southern California: Preliminary Findings from the Day Labor
Survey: Working Paper Series. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for the Study of Urban Poverty,
1999.
19 Verdugo, R. R. The Hispanic Labor Force: An Analysis of Selected Topics, 1987-90. Claremont,
CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1990.
20 Waldinger, R. Social Capital or Social Closure? Immigrant Networks in the Labor Market: Working
Paper Series. Los Angeles, CA: Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies, University of Southern
California Los Angeles, 1997.
21 Waldinger, R. “Black/Immigrant Competition Re-assessed: New Evidence from Los Angeles.”
Sociology Perspectives, 40 (1997): 365-386.
13

22 Waldinger, R. Beyond the Sidestream: The Language of Work in an Immigrant Metropolis: Working
Paper Series. Los Angeles, CA: Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies University of California at
Los Angeles, 1997.
23 Waldinger, R., C. Erickson, R. Milkman, D. J. B. Mitchell, A. Valenzuela, K. Wong, and M. Zeitlin,
Helots No More: A Case Study of the Justice for Janitors Campaign in Los Angeles. The Lewis
Center for Regional Policy Studies The University of California at Los Angeles, 1996.
24 Walsh, J. C. “Laboring at the Margins: Welfare and the Regulation of Mexican and Central
American Workers in Los Angeles.” M.A. Thesis, University of Southern California, 1997.
25 Wright, R., and M. Ellis. “Nativity, Ethnicity, and the Evolution of the Intra-urban Division on Labor
in Metropolitan Los Angeles, 1970-1990.” Urban Geography, 18 (1997): 243-263.
26 Yaffe, J. “Institutional and Racial Barriers to Employment Equity for Hispanics.” Hispanic Journal of
Behavioral Sciences 16 (1994): 211-29.
27 Yaffe, J. “Latina Managers in Public Employment: Perceptions of Organizational Discrimination.”
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 17 (1995): 334-346.
Health and Medicine
1 Alcalay, R., and R. A. Bell. “Ethnicity and Health Knowledge Gaps: Impact of the California Wellness
Guide on Poor African-American, Hispanic, and Non-Hispanic White Women.” Health
Communication 8 (1996): 303-329.
2 Alexander, M., K. Grumbach, and L Remy. “Congestive Heart Failure Hospitalizations and Survival
in California: Patterns According to Race Ethnicity.” American Heart Journal 137 (1999): 919-927.
3 Ammerman, S. D., and M. Nolden. “Neighborhood-Based Tobacco Advertising Adolescents.”
Western Journal of Medicine 162 (1995): 514-518.
4 Anderson, L. M., D. L. Wood, and C. D. Sherbourne. “Maternal Acculturation and Childhood
Immunization Levels among Children in Latino Families in Los Angeles.” American Journal of Public
Health, 87 (1997): 2018+
5 Baezconde-Garbanati, L. A Resource Tool for HIV/AIDS Program Planning in Latino Communities:
Los Angeles County AIDS Statistics, Directory of Services and Bibliographic Information. Los
Angeles, CA: AIDS Education and the Latino Community Project, Chicano Studies Research Center,
1991.
6 Baezconde-Garbanati, L. C. Porticello, and J. Garbanati. “Disparities in Latina Health.” Hispanic
Journal of Behavioral Sciences 21 (1999): 302-309.
7 Baezconde-Garbanati, L., J. Garbanati, C. Portubal, and R. Lopez. “Entering a New Era: Strategies of
the Hispanic/Latino Tobacco Education Network for Organizing and Mobilizing Hispanics.” In
Planning and Implementing Effective Tobacco Education and Prevention Programs. ed. M Frost,
112-113. Springfield, Ill.: C.C. Thomas, 1999.
8 Baker, D. W., C. D. Stevens, and R. H. Brook. “Regular Source of Ambulatory Care and Medical-
Care Utilization by Patients Presenting to a Public Hospital Emergency Department.” Journal of the
American Medical Association 271 (1994): 1909-1912.
14

9 Balcazar, H., F. G. Castro, and J. L. Krul. “Cancer Risk Reduction in Mexican American Women: The
Role of Acculturation, Education, and Health Risk Factors.” Health Education Quarterly 22 (1995):
61-84.
10 Bell, R A., and R. Alcalay. “The Impact of the Wellness Guide/Guia on Hispanic Women’s Well-
Being-Related Knowledge, Efficacy Beliefs, and Behaviors: The Mediating Role of Acculturation.”
Health Education & Behavior 24 (1997): 326-343.
11 Bennett, M. E., J. H. Miller, and W. G. Woodall. “Drinking, Binge Drinking, and Other Drug Use
Among Southwestern Undergraduates: Three-year Trends.” American Journal of Drug and Alcohol
Abuse 25 (1999): 331-350.
12 Bentley, J. R., R. J. Delfino, and T. H. Taylor. “Differences in Breast-Cancer Stage at Diagnosis
Between Non-Hispanic White and Hispanic Populations, San Diego County 1988-1993.” Breast
Cancer Research and Treatment, 50 (1998): 1-9.
13 Black, S. A., and K. S. Markides. “Depressive Symptoms and Mortality in Older Mexican
Americans.” Annals of Epidemiology 9 (1999): 45-52.
14 Boer, J. T., M. Pastor, J. L. Sadd, and L. D. Snyder. “Is There Environmental Racism: The
Demographics of Hazardous Waste in Los Angeles County.” Social Science Quarterly 78 (1997): 793-
810.
15 Breslow, L., and T. Tiasele. “An Experience with Health Promotion in the Inner-City.” American
Journal of Health Promotion 10 (1996): 185
16 Brindis, C., A. L. Wolfe, V. McCarter, and S. Ball. “The Associations Between Immigrant Status and
Risk Behavior Patterns in Latino Adolescents.” Journal of Adolescent Health 17 (1995): 99-105.
17 Brown, E. R., V. R. Burciaga, R. Wyn, and H. Yu. Who Are California’s Uninsured? Policy Brief Los
Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, 1994.
18 Brunt, M. J., M. J. Milbauer, and S. M. Levenson. Health Status and Practices of Urban Caribbean
Latinos with Diabetes Mellitus.” Ethnicity & Disease 8 (1998): 158-166.
19 Cantero, P., J. Richardson, L. Baezconde-Garbanati, and G. Mark. “The Association Between
Acculturation and Health Practices Among Middle Aged and Elderly Latinas.” Journal of Ethnicity and
Disease 9 (1999): 166-180.
20 Carlisle, D. M., B. D. Leake, and M. F. Shapiro. “Racial and Ethnic Differences in the Use of Invasive
Cardiac Procedures Among Cardiac Patients In Los Angeles County 1986” American Journal of Public
Health, 85, (1995): 352-356.
21 Carlisle, D. M., B. D. Leake, and M. F. Shapiro. “Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Use of
Cardiovascular Procedures - Associations with the Type of Health Insurance.” American Journal of
Public Health 87 (1997): 263-267.
21 Carlisle, D. M., R. B. Valdez, and M. F. Shapiro. “Geographic - Variation in Rates of Selected
Surgical - Procedures within Los Angeles County.” Health Services Research 30 (1995): 27-42.
22 Castaneda, D., and B. Collins. “Structure and Activities of Agencies Providing HIV and AIDS
Education and Prevention to Latina/Latino Communities.” AIDS Education and Prevention 9 (1997):
533-550.
23 Castro, F., J. Elder, K. Coe, et al., “Mobilizing Churches for Health Promotion in Latino
Communities: Companeros en la Salud.” Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs 18
15

(1995): 127-135.
24 Cervantes, A. In Our Hands: An AIDS Story for All Latinas. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Alliance
for a Drug Free Community, 1996.
25 Chabra, A., G. F. Chavez, and E. S. Harris. “Hospitalization for Mental Illness in Adolescents - Risk
Groups and Impact on the Health Care System.” Journal of Adolescent Health 24 (1999): 349-356.
26 Chavez, L. R., F. A. Hubbell, S. I. Mishra, and R. B. Valdez. “The Influence of Fatalism on Self-
Reported Use of Papanicolaou Smears.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 13 (1997):
418-424.
27 Cherpitel, C. J. “Differences in Performance of Screening Instruments for Problem Drinking among
Blacks, Whites and Hispanics in an Emergency Room Population.” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 59
(1998): 420-426.
28 Conrad, J. K., K. A. Hollenbach, and J. T. Fullerton. “Use of Prenatal Services by Hispanic Women in
San Diego County - A Comparison of Urban and Rural Settings.” Journal of Nurse-Midwifery 43
(1998): 90-96.
29 Cousineau, M., E. R. Brown, and S. Shen. The Uninsured in Los Angeles: Policy Brief. Los Angeles,
CA: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, 1994.
30 Croen, L. A.,G. M. Shaw, and G. R. Wasserman. “Racial and Ethnic Variations in the Prevalence of
Orofacial Clefts in California.” American Journal of Medical Genetics 79, (1998): 42-47.
31 Cunningham, W. E., M. F. Shapiro, and R. D. Hays. ”Constitutional Symptoms and Health Quality of
Life in Patients with Symptomatic HIV Disease.” American Journal of Medicine 104 (1998):
129-136.
32 Delfino, R. J. “Demographic Differences in Prostate-Cancer Incidence and Stage - An Examination of
Population Diversity in California.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 14 (1998): 96-102.
33 Dorrington, C., and D. Hayes-Bautista. Understanding Latino Families, Scholarship, Policy, and
Practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1995.
34 Douer, D., S. Prestonmartin, E. Chang, and P. W. Nichols. “High Frequency of Acute Promyelocytic
Leukemia Among Latinos with Acute Myeloid-Leukemia.” Blood 87 (1996): 308-313.
35 Elder, J. P., N. R. Campbell, and J. I. Candelaria. “Project Salsa - Development and Institutionalization
of a Nutritional Health Promotion Project in a Latino Community.” American Journal of Health
Promotion 12 (1998): 391-401
36 Espino, D. V., L. J. Lichtentein, and H. P. Hazuda. “Correlates of Prescriptions and Over - The
Counter Medication Usage Among Older Mexican-American - The Hispanic Epese Study.” Journal of
the American Geriatrics Society 46 (1998): 1228-1234.
37 Fenton, J. J., N. Moss, H. G. Khalil, and S. Asch. “Effect of California Proposition 187 on the Use of
Primary-Care Clinics.” Western Journal of Medicine 166 (1997): 16-20.
38 Flaskerod, J. H., G. Uman, and R. Lara. “Sexual Practices, Attitudes, and Knowledge Related to HIV
Transmission in Low-income Los Angeles Hispanic Women.” The Journal of Sex Research 33
(1996): 343-53.
16

39 Flaskerod, J., A. Nyamathi, and G. C. Uman. “Longitudinal Effects of an HIV Testing and Counseling
Program for Low-Income Latina Women.” Ethnicity and Health 2 (1997): 89-103.
40 Foerster, S. B., K. W. Kizer, L. K. Disogra, and D. G. Bal. “California’s 5-A-Day-For-Better-Health
Campaign - An Innovative Population-Based Effort to Effect Large-Scale Dietary Change.” American
Journal of Preventive Medicine 11 (1995): 124-131.
41 Fuentes-Afflick, E., N. A. Hessol, and E. J. Perez-Stable. “Testing the Epidemiologic Paradox of Low
Birth Weight in Latinos.” Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 153 (1999): 147-153.
42 Gerber, E. “Reconceiving Pregnancy, Creating Mothers: Pregnancy Care Attitudes and Beliefs in
African American and Latino Women in Los Angeles.” Ph.D. diss., University of California Los
Angeles, 1993.
43 Giacomini, M.K. “Gender and Ethnic-Differences in Hospital-Based Procedure Utilization in
California.” Archives of Internal Medicine 156 (1996): 1217-1224.
44 Gostin, L. “Informed Consent, Cultural Sensitivity, and Respect for Persons.” Journal of the
American Medical Association, 274 (1995): 844-845
45 Hackler, D. Participation in the School Breakfast Program: A Case Study of Southern California
Schools. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1995.
46 Halfon, N., D. L. Wood, R. B. Valdez, and M. Pereyra. “Medicaid Enrollment and Health-Services
Access By Latino Children in Inner City Los Angeles “ Journal of the American Medical Association
277 (1997): 636-641.
47 Hayes-Bautista, D. Directory of Latino/Hispanic Physicians, 1999. Los Angeles, CA: Center for the
Study of Latino Health, Division of General Internal Medicine & Health Services Research UCLA
School of Medicine, 1999.
48 Hayes-Bautista, D. Formulating Health Policy in a Multicultural Society. Boulder, CO: Westview
Press, 1992.
49 Hayes-Bautista, D. Immunization Levels of Latino and White Non-Hispanic Elderly in Los Angeles
County, California, 1996. Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of Latino Health at UCLA; Edward
R. Roybal Institute for Applied Gerontology at CSULA, 1997.
50 Hayes-Bautista, D. Latino Health Indicators and the Underclass Model: From Paradox to New Policy
Models. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992.
51 Hayes-Bautista, D. The Health Status of Latinos in California. Woodland Hills, CA: The California
Endowment California HealthCare Foundation, 1997.
52 Hayes-Bautista, D. “Managed Care and the Latino Market.” The Talbert Journal of Health Care 1
(1997).
53 Hayes-Bautista, D. “The Intellectual Basis for Latino AIDS Policy: Towards the Humanities and
Health Policy.” The Journal of Medical Humanities 13 (1992)
54 Hayes-Bautista, D. The Health of Latino California: Chartbook 1997. Los Angeles, CA: Center for the
Study of Latino Health at UCLA, 1998.
55 Hayes-Bautista, D., and G. Rodriguez. Immigrant Use of Public Programs in the United States.
Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of Latino Health at UCLA, 1997.
17

56 Hayes-Bautista, D., Barriers to Health Care for U.S. Citizen Children of Undocumented Parents.
Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of Latino Health at UCLA, 1995.
57 Hayes-Bautista, D., L. Baezconde-Garbanati, and M. Hayes-Bautista. “Latino Health in Los Angeles:
Family Medicine in a Changing Minority Context.” Family Practice 11 (1994).
58 Hayes-Bautista, D., L. Baezconde-Garbanati, and W. Schink. “Latino Health in California: 1985-1990:
Implications for Family Practice.” Family Medicine 26 (1994): 556-562.
59 Hayes-Bautista, D., L. Baezconde-Garbanati, W. Schink, and M. Hayes-Bautista. “Latino Health in
California, 1985-1990: Implications for Family Medicine.” Family Medicine Journal 26 (1994):
556-62.
60 Hayes-Bautista, D., P. Hsu, R. Beltran, and J. Villagomez. The Latino Physician Shortage in
California. Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of Latino Health, UCLA School of Medicine, 1999.
61 Hayes-Bautista, D., R. E. Garcia, S. Ming-Hsien, and R. Brooks. Chartbook of Ethnic/Racial Groups
Health and Medical Care Indicators for L.A. County. St. Louis, MO: University of Missouri St. Louis
Center of Excellence for Academic Development, 1993.
62 Hispanic Market Connections, Inc. Hispanic Elders Discuss Health Interests and Needs: A Qualitative
Study Conducted in New York City and Los Angeles, California. Washington, DC: National Resource
Center on Health Promotion and Aging, 1990.
63 Hondagneu-Sotelo, P., and E. Avila. “I’m Here, but I’m There’: The Meanings of Latina Transitional
Motherhood.” Gender & Society 15 (1997): 548-569.
64 Hook, E. B., A. D. Garothers, and C. A. Hecht. “Elevated Maternal Age-Specific Rates of Down
Syndrome Liveborn Offspring of Women of Mexican and Central American Origin.” Prenatal
Diagnosis 19 (1999): 245-251.
65 Hovey, J. D., and C. A. King. “Acculturative Stress, Depression, and Suicidal Ideation among
Immigrant and Second Generation Latino Adolescents.” Journal of the American Academy of Child
and Adolescent Psychiatry 35 (1996): 1183-1192.
66 Howard, B. V., E. J. Mayerdavis, and D. Goff. “Relationships Between Insulin-Resistance and
Lipoproteins in Nondiabetic African-Americans, Hispanic, And Non-Hispanic Whites - The insulin -
Resistance Atherosclerosis Study.” Metabolism-Clinical and Experimental 47 (1998): 1174-1179.
67 Howe, S. L., R. J. Delfino, and T. H. Taylor. “The Risk of Invasive Cervical-Cancer Among Hispanics
- Evidence for Targeted Preventive Interventions.” Preventive Medicine 27 (1998):
674-680.
68 Hubbell, F. A., L. R. Chavez, and S. I. Mishra. “Differing Beliefs About Breast-Cancer Among
Latinas and Anglo Women.” Western Journal of Medicine 164 (1996): 405-409.
69 Johnson, F W., P. J. Gruenewald, A. J. Treno, and G. A. Taff. “Drinking Over the Life-Course Within
Gender and Ethnic-Groups: A Hyperparametric Analysis.” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 59 (1998):
568-580.
70 Karter, A. J., J. M. Gazaniga, and R. D. Gohen. “Ischemic-Heart-Disease and Stroke Mortality in
African-American, Hispanic, and Non-Hispanic White Men and Women, 1985 to 1991” Western
Journal of Medicine 169 (1998): 139-145.
71 King, T. K., B. Borrelli, and C. Black. “Minority Women and Tobacco - Implications for Smoking
Cessation Interventions.” Annals of Behavioral Medicine 19 (1997): 301-313.
18

72 Kleinman, L. C., H. E. Freeman, J. Perlman, and L. Gelberg. “Homing in on the Homeless: Assessing
the Physical Health of Homeless Adults in Los Angeles County Using an Original Method to Obtain
Physical Examination Data in a Survey.” Health Services Research 31 (1996).
73 Koegel, P. “La Perspectiva Antropologica Como Enfoque Diferente de los Enfermos sin Hogar
(Through a Different Lens: An Anthropological Perspective on the Homeless Mentally Ill)”
Intervencion Psicosocial 7 (1998): 27-46.
74 Koprowski, C., and R. K. Ross. “Diet, Body Size and Menarche in a Multiethnic Cohort.” British
Journal of Cancer 79 (1999): 1907-1911.
75 Lamp, C., J. George, J. Wright, and A. B. Joy. “Use of home study to improve nutrition knowledge in
two rural counties of California.” Journal of Nutrition Education 31 (1999): 94-98.
76 Landrine, H, E. A. Klonoff, and R. Alcaraz. “Asking Age and Identification May Decrease Minor
Access to Tobacco.” Preventive Medicine 25 (1996): 301-306.
77 Legorreta, A. P., J. Christian-Herman, and R. D. O’Connor. “Compliance with National Asthma
Management Guidelines and Specialty Care - A Health Maintenance Organization Experience.”
Archives of Internal Medicine 158 (1998): 457-464.
78 Liu, L. H., D. Deapen, and L. Bernstein. “Socioeconomic-Status and Cancers of the Female Breast and
Reproductive - Organs - A Comparison Across Racial/Ethnic Populations in Los Angeles County.”
Cancer Causes & Control 9 (1998): 369-380.
79 Lori, K., and E. G. Walters. “Cuidaremos: The HECO Approach to Breast-Cancer Self-Examination.”
International Quarterly of Community Health Education 1 (1980-81): 125-134.
80 Marin, B. V. “Hispanic Culture: Effects on Prevention and Care.” FOCUS - A guide to AIDS
Research and Counseling 6 (1991): 1-2.
81 Marin, B. V., E. J. Perezstable, G. Marin, and W. W. Hauch. “Effects of a Community Intervention to
Change Smoking-Behavior Among Hispanics.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 10 (1994):
340-347.
82 Mein, S., and M. A. Winkleby. “Concerns and Misconceptions About Cardiovascular-Disease Risk-
Factors- A Focus Group Evaluation with Low Income Hispanics” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences 20 (1998): 192-211.
83 Meinhardt, K., A. Cablas, J. Jerrell, and D. Jay. The California Household Mental Health Survey of
1992: A Telephone Survey of 9,000 Households. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Mental
Health, 1994.
84 Mills, P. K. “Correlation Analysis of Pesticide Use Data and Cancer Incidence Rates in California
Counties.” Archives of Environmental Health 53 (1998): 410-413.
85 Moreno, C., R. Laniadolaborin, J. F. Sallis, and J. P. Elder. “Parental Influences to Smoke in Latino
Youth.” Preventive Medicine 23 (1994): 48-53.
86 Navarro, A. M. “Cigarette-Smoking Among Adult Latinos: The California Tobacco Base-Line
Survey.” Annals of Behavioral Medicine 18 (1996): 238-245.
87 Navarro, A. M., K. L. Senn, and L. J. McNicholas. “Por La Vida Model Intervention Enhances Use of
19

Cancer - Screening Test Among Latinas.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 15 (1998): 32-41.
88 Nuno, T. Multicultural Area Health Education Center and National Coalition of Hispanic Health and
Human Services Organizations. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles County Hispanic Youth Health
Assessment, 1998.
89 Nuno, T., C. Dorrington, and I. Alvarez. Los Angeles County Hispanic Youth Health Assessment
Report: 1998. Los Angeles, CA: Multicultural Area Health Education Center (MAHEC) and
Washington, D.C: National Coalition of Hispanic Health and Human Services Organizations, 1998.
90 Osmond, D. H., K. Vranizan, D. Schillinger, and A. L. Steward. “Measuring the Need for Medical-
Care in an Ethnically Diverse Population.” Health Service Research 31 (1996): 551-571.
91 Padilla, A. M., and V. N. Salgado de Synder. “Hispanics: What the Culturally Informed Evaluator
Needs to Know.” In Cultural Competence for Evaluators, ed. M. A. Orlandi, R. Weston, and L. G.
Epstein, 117-146. Rockville: MA: Unites States Department of Health and Human Services, 1992.
92 Pasick, R. J., C. N. D’Onofrio, and R. Otero-Sabogal. “Similarities and Differences Across Cultures:
Questions to Inform a Third Generation for Health Promotion Research.” Health Education Quarterly
23 (1986): 142-161.
93 Perez-Scamilla, R., D. Himmel-Green, and S. Segura Millan. “Prenatal and Perinatal Factors
Associated with Breast-Feeding Initiation Among Inner- City Puerto Rican Women.” Journal of the
American Dietetic Association 98 (1998): 657-663.
94 Perezstable, E. J., G. Marin, and S. F. Posner. “Ethnic Comparison of Attitudes and Beliefs about
Cigarette-Smoking.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 13 (1998): 167-174.
95 Perezstable, E. J., R. Oterosabogal, F. Sabogal, and S. J. McPhee. “Self-Reported Use of Cancer
Screening-Tests among Latinos and Anglos in a Prepaid Health Plan.” Archives of Internal Medicine
154, (1994): 1073-1081.
96 Perkowski, L. C., C. A. Stroupbenham, and K. S. Markides. “Lower-Extremity Functioning in Older
Mexican-Americans and its Association with Medical Problems.” Journal of the American Geriatrics
Society 46 (1998): 411-418.
97 Piñero, F., V. Gil, M. Donis. et. al. “Factors Involved in Noncompliance with Drug in Non-Insulin
Dependent Diabetes Melitus.” Atencion Primaria 20 (1997): 415-420.
98 R. Burciago Valdez, and G. Dallek. Does the Health Care System Serve Latinos and Blacks in Los
Angeles County? An Analysis of Hospital Use in 1987. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy
Institute, 1991.
99 Ray, N. F., M. Thamer, and B. Fadillioglu. “Race, Income, Urbanicity, and Asthma Hospitalization in
California - A Small Area Analysis. Chest 113 (1998): 1277-1284.
100 Sabogal, F., E. Perezstable, and R. Otero-Sabogal. “Gender, Ethnic and Acculturation Differences in
Sexual Behaviors: Hispanic and non-Hispanic White Adults.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences
17 (1995): 139-159.
101 Sabogal, F., R. Otero-Sabogal, R. J. Pasick, et al. “Printed Health Education Materials for Diverse
Communities: Suggestions Learned from the Field.” Health Education Quarterly, 23 (1996):
S123-141.
20

102 Sanders, P. K. “Correlates of Healthy Eating Habits in Low-Income Black Women and Latinas.”
Preventive Medicine 23 (1994): 781-787.
103 Sandoval, O. M. Public Policy and Health Care Access Among Latino Elderly. Long Beach, CA:
California State University at Long Beach, 1998.
104 Santos, S. J., L. M. Bohon, and J. J. Sanchez-Sosa. “Childhood Family Relationships, Marital and
Work Conflict, and Mental-Health Distress in Mexican Immigrants.” Journal of Community
Psychology 26 (1998): 491-508.
105 Schuster, M. A., R. M. Bell, and G. A. Najajima. “The Sexual Practices of Asian and Pacific Islander
High-Schools Students.” Journal of Adolescent Health 23 (1998): 221-231.
106 Sedaghat, N., and C. F. Tam. “Dietary-Intake, Dieting Attitudes and Inactivity in Asian, Hispanic,
Persian and Caucasian Fourth Graders Living in Los Angeles.” Fased Journal 12 (1998): 1315-1315.
107 Sola, A. “Comprehension of Plans of Care by Hispanic Families with Infants in 2 California
Intensive - Care Nurseries - How Informed is the Informed Consent.” Pediatrics 102 (1998):
763-763.
108 Stauton, A. Immigration, Culture and Fertility in California: Social and Cultural Factors Affecting
Family Planning among Recent Immigrants from Mexico, Central America, and Southeast Asia: A
Literature Review and Synthesis of Findings. Los Angeles, CA: The Pacific Institute for Women’s
Health, 1996.
109 Taylor, D. J., G. F. Chavez, and E. J. Adams. “Demographic Characteristics in Adult Paternity for First
Births to Adolescents Under 15 Years of Age.” Journal of Adolescent Health 24 (1999): 251-258.
110 The National Council of La Raza. On the Sidelines: Hispanic Elderly and the Continuum of Care.
Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1991.
111 The National Council of La Raza. Reducing Hispanic Teenage Pregnancy and Family Poverty: A
Replication Guide. Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1992.
112 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Latinos and Health Care Insurance Participation. Claremont, CA:
The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1992.
113 UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. Fact Sheet: Women’s Health Behaviors. Los Angeles, CA:
UCLA, Center for Health Policy Research, The Commonwealth Fund Communications Office, 1992.
114 UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. Fact Sheet: Women’s Use of Clinical Preventive Services.
Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, 1992.
115 Unger, J. B., and G. B. Molina. “The UCLA Multidimensional Condom Attitudes Scale: Validity in a
Sample of Low-Acculturated Hispanic Women.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 21 (1999):
199-211.
116 Waterman, S. H., L. L. Hill, and B. A. Robyn. “A model Immunization Demonstration for Preschooler
in an Inner City Barrio, San Diego, California, 1992-1994.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine
12 (1996): 8-13.
117 Webber, L. S., V. Osganian, R. V. Luepker, and H. A. Feldman. “Cardiovascular Risk-Factors Among
Third Grade Children in 4 Regions of the United States – The Catch Study.” American Journal of
21

Epidemiology 141 (1995): 428-439.
118 Weddle, M. G., R. A. Bissell, and R. Shesser. “Working Women at Risk: Results From a Survey of
Hispanic Injury Patients.” Journal of Occupational Medicine 35 (1993): 712-713.
119 Weinman, M., and P. Smith. “US and Mexico Born Hispanic Teen Mothers: A Descriptive Study of
Factors That Relate to Postpartum Compliance.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Health Sciences 16
(1994): 186-194.
120 White, R. H., H. Zhou, and P. S. Romano. “Incidence of Idiopathic Deep Venous Thrombosis and
Secondary Thromboembolism among Ethnic-Groups in California.” Annals of Internal Medicine 128
(1998): 737-740.
121 Whitehorse, L., R. Manzano, G. Hahn, and D. Cassidey. “Culturally Tailoring a Physical Activity
Program for Hispanic Women. Recruitment Successes of La Vida Buena Salsa Aerobics.” Journal of
Health Education 30 (1999): S18-S24.
122 Yamamoto, J., D. T. Takeuchi, and S. Sue. “Cross-Cultural Epidemiology.” Psychiatry and Clinical
Neurosciences 52 (1998): S265-S267.
123 Zimmermann, W., and M. Fix. Declining Immigrant Applications for Medi-Cal and Welfare Benefits
in Los Angeles County. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, 1999.
Immigration
1 Ahmed, B., and G. J. Robinson. Estimates of Emigration of the Foreign-Born Population: 1980-1990.
Washington, DC: Population Division US Bureau of the Census, 1994.
2 Baker, S. G. “The Amnesty Aftermath: Current Policy Issues Stemming from the Legalization
Programs of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control.” International Migration Review, 31 (1997):
5-27.
3 Bean, F. D., J. V. Van Hook, J. Glick. Poverty and Welfare Recipiency Among Immigrants in
California. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1994.
4 Bhargava, A., K. Gumbleton, A. Wilhelm, and L. Morrow. Why They Count: Immigrant Contributions
to the Golden State. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1996.
5 Boyle, T. C. The Tortilla Curtain. New York, NY: Penguin Books, 1995.
6 Chavez, L. R. Shadowed Lives: Undocumented Immigrants in American Society. New York, NY:
Harcourt Brace Jonanovich College Publishers, 1992.
7 Chavez, L. R., F. A. Hubbell, and S. I. Mishra. “Undocumented Latina Immigrants in Orange County,
California: A Comparative Analysis.” International Migration Review 31 (1997): 88-107.
8 Coutin, S. From Refugees to Immigrants: The Legal Strategies of Salvadoran Immigrants and Their
Advocates. Los Angeles, CA: Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies, UCLA, 1996.
9 Cowan, G., L. Martinez, and S. Mendiola. “Predictors of Attitudes Toward Illegal Latino Immigrants.”
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 19 (1997): 403-415.
22

10 De la Garza, R., M. Orozco, and M. Baraona. Binational Impact of Latino Remittances. Claremont,
CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1997.
11 De la Garza, R., R. Frahm, G. Freeman, C. Sheridan, and B. Wampler. Operation Jobs: An Evaluation.
Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1997.
12 De la Garza, R., R. Frahm, G. Freeman, C. Sheridan, and B. Wampler. Operation Jobs: Innovations in
INS Enforcement of Employer Sanctions Policy Brief, Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy
Institute, 1997.
13 Ellis, M. and R. Wright. The Industrial Division of Labor among Immigrants and Internal Migrants to
the Los Angeles Economy. The Lewis Center for Regional Policy The University of California at Los
Angeles, 1997.
14 Fernandez, E. W., and G. Robinson. Illustrative Ranges of the Distribution of Undocumented
Immigrants by State. Washington, DC: Population Division US Bureau of the Census, 1994.
15 Fix, M., and W. Zimmermann. All Under One Roof: Mixed-Status Families in an Era of Reform.
Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, 1999.
16 Freeman, G., and K. Gumbleton. Voices of the Unheard: The Impact of Welfare Reform on
California’s Immigrant Population. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1997.
17 Gould, D. Immigrant Links to the Home Country : Implications for Trade, Welfare, and Factor
Returns. New York, NY: Garland Publishers, 1996.
18 Hamilton, N., and N. Chinchilla. “Central American Migration: A Framework for Analysis.” Latin
American Research Review, 26 (1991): 75-110.
19 Hondagneu-Sotelo, P. Gendered Transitions: Mexican Experience of Immigration. Los Angeles, CA:
University of California Press, 1994.
20 Johnson, H. P. Undocumented Immigration to California 1980-1993. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy
Institute of California, 1996.
21 Johnson, H. P., B. I. Reyes, L. Mameesh, and E. Barbour. Taking the Oath: An Analysis of
Naturalization in California and the United States. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of
California, 1999.
22 Lopez, H. “Zapotec Immigration: The San Luis Quiavini Experience” Aztlan, 24 (1993): 129-150.
23 Marcelli, E. “The Unauthorized Mexican Immigrant Population and Welfare in Los Angeles County:
A Comparative Statistical Survey” Sociological Perspectives 41 (1997)
24 Marcelli, E. A. “The Political and Economic Effects of Illegal Mexican Immigrant to Los Angeles
County.” Ph. D. diss., University of Southern California Los Angeles, 1997.
25 Myers, D. The Changing Immigrants of Southern California. Los Angeles, CA: Research Report No.
LCRI-95-04R, Lusk Center Research Institute, School of Urban Planning and Development, University
of Southern California, 1995.
26 Passel, J. How Much Do Immigrants Really Cost? Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy
Institute, 1994.
23

27 Portes, A. Immigrant America: A Portrait. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 1990.
28 Portes, A. Los Angeles in the Context of the New Immigration. Los Angeles, CA: Lewis Center for
Regional Policy Studies University of California at Los Angeles, 1997.
29 Quinton, W. J., G. Gowan, and B. D. Watson. “Personality and Attitudinal Predictors of Support of
Proposition-187: California Anti-Illegal Immigrant Initiative.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology
26, (1996): 2204-2223.
30 Reyes, B. Dynamics of Immigration: Return Migration to Western Mexico. San Francisco, CA: Public
Policy Institute of California, 1997.
31 Rochín, R. I., and M. D. Castillo. Immigration, Colonial Formation and Latino Poor in Rural
California: Evolving Immiseration. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1993.
32 Schmidley, D. A., and G. Robinson. How Well Does The Current Population Survey Measure The
Foreign Born Population in the United States. Washington, DC: Population Division US Bureau of the
Census, 1998.
33 Sierra, C. M. et al. “Latino Politics in California” American Political Science
Review 92 (1998): 475-476.
34 Straughan, J. “Factors Affecting Community Cohesion and Belizean Immigrants in the Los Angeles
Area.” Los Angeles, CA: Masters thesis, California State University at Los Angeles, 1992.
35 Suarez-Orozco, M. (editor) Crossings: Mexican Immigration in Interdisciplinary Perspectives.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies, 1998.
36 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, Immigrants and the California Economy: Dispelling the Myths.
Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1992.
37 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Factors Affecting AFDC and SSI Recipiency Among U.S.
Immigrants and Natives. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1996.
38 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Faulty Immigration Studies Mislead Policymakers and Inflame
Anti-Immigrant Sentiment. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1994.
39 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Migrant Enumeration. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy
Institute, 1993.
40 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Dual Citizenship, Domestic Politics and Naturalization Rates of
Latino Immigrants in the U.S. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1996.
41 Valenzuela, A. Jr. “Gender Roles and Settlement Activities Among Children and Their Immigrant
Families” American Behavioral Scientist 42 (1998-1999): 720-742.
42 Wallace, S. “The New Urban Latinos: Central Americans in a Mexican Immigrant Environment.”
Urban Affairs Quarterly 25 (1998)
Information Technology and the Internet
1 Bagasao, P., E. Macias, and S. Jones. Challenges to Bridging the Digital Divide: Building
Better on Ramps to the Information Highway Policy Brief. Claremont, CA: The Tomas
Rivera Policy Institute, 1999.
24

2 Chabran, R., A. Valdez and S. Zeig. Access to Information and Telecommunications Technology: A
Survey of Latino Research Centers. New York, NY: Inter-University Program for Latino Research,
1992.
3 Larson, A., and T. Wilhelm. Latinos and the Information Superhighway. Claremont, CA: The Tomas
Rivera Policy Institute, 1994.
4 Refugio-Gutierrez, M., and A. Wilhelm. How Will the E-rate Impact Latinos? Claremont, CA: The
Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1998.
5 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Building Bridges: Latinos and Information Technology. Claremont,
CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1998.
6 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. The New Information Technology and the Educational of
Hispanics: The Promise and the Dilemma. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1986.
7 Wilhelm, A. The Cost of Access: Will There Be Toll Booths on the Information Highway?
Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1995.
8 Wilhelm, A. At What Cost Competition? Impacts of Free Telecommunications Deregulation on
Communities. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1995.
9 Wilhelm, A. Buying into the Computer Age: A Look at the Hispanic Middle Class. Claremont, CA:
The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1997.
10 Wilhelm, A. Closing the Digital Divide: Enhancing Hispanic Participation in the Information Age.
Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1998.
11 Wilhelm, A. Latinos and Information Technology: Perspectives for the Twenty-first Century.
Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1996.
12 Wilhelm, A. Out of Reach? Latinos, Educational, and Technology in California. Claremont, CA: The
Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1997.
Politics
1 Acuna, R. Anything But Mexican: Chicanos in Contemporary Los Angeles. New York, NY: Verso,
1996.
2 Armbruster, R., K. Geron, and E. Benacich. “The Assault on California’s Latino Immigrants: The
Politics of Proposition 187.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 19 (1995):
655-63.
3 Bass, L. E., and L. M. Casper. Are There Differences in Registration and Voting Behavior Between
Naturalized and Native Born Americans? Washington, DC: Population Division US Bureau of the
Census, 1999.
4 Calderon, J.Z. “Mexican American Politics in a Multi-ethnic Community: The Case of Monterey Park,
1985-1990.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Los Angeles, 1991.
25

5 Camarillo, A. Chicanos in a Changing Society : from Mexican Pueblos to American Barrios in Santa
Barbara and Southern California, 1848-1930. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996.
6 Chabran, R. “The Emergence of Neo-Conservatism in Chicano/Latino Discourses.” Cultural Studies 4
(1990): 217-227.
7 Chávez, E. “Creating Aztlán: The Chicano Movement in Los Angeles, 1966-1978.” Ph.D.
diss., University of California at Los Angeles, 1994.
8 Chávez, J. R. Eastside landmark : a history of the East Los Angeles Community Union, 1968-1993.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1998.
9 De la Garza, R., H. Pachon, and D. Falcon. California Hispanic Perspectives Poll: A State Survey of
Latino Attitudes Towards Four Current Policy Issues: Affirmative Action, Crime, Immigration, and
Welfare Reform. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1996.
10 De la Garza, R., M. Baraona, and M. Orozco. Family Ties and Ethnic Lobbies: Latino Relations with
Latin America. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1998.
11 Delgado-Bernal, D. “Chicana School Resistance and Grassroots Leadership: Providing an Alternative
History of the 1968 East Los Angeles Blowouts.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Los Angeles,
1997.
12 Diaz-Veizades, J., and E. T. Chang. “Building Cross-cultural Coalitions: A Case Study of the Black-
Korean Alliance and the Latino-Black Roundtable.” Ethnic and Racial Studies, 19: 680-700.
13 Flores, W. V. Chicano Empowerment and the Politics of At-Large Elections in California: a
Tale of Two Cities. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Chicano Research, 1990.
14 Hayes-Bautista, D. “Generational Equity and Minorities: Young Latinos, Older Anglos, and Public
Policy: Lessons from California.” Generations 15 (1991).
15 Hayes-Bautista, D., R. B. Hurtado, A.,Valdez, and A. Hernandez. No Longer a Minority: Latinos and
Social Policy in California. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center, 1992.
16 Hayes-Bautista, D., W. Schink, and M. Hayes-Bautista. “Latinos and the 1992 Los Angeles Riots: A
Behavioral Sciences Perspective.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 15 (1999).
17 Lopez-Garza, M. Los Angeles: Ascendant Chicano Power. Los Angeles, CA: Report on the Americas,
1992.
18 Lotchin, R. W. “Hispanics, Women, and Western Cities - Setting The Place - Political Emergence and
the Renaissance of Western Exceptionalism” Western Historical Quarterly 29 (1998): 293-315.
19 Marin, M. V. Social Protest in an Urban Barrio: A Study of the Chicano Movement, 1966-74.
Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1991.
20 McMurrer, D.P., and I. V. Sawhill. The Declining Importance of Class. Washington, DC: The Urban
Institute, 1992.
21 Menchaca, M. The Mexican Outsiders : A Community History of Marginalization and
Discrimination in California. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1995.
22 Moran, R. “What if Latinos Really Mattered in the Public Policy Debate?” California Law Review, 85:
1315+
26

23 Morrison, P. A. “Demographic Influences on Latinos Political Empowerment: Comparative
Local Illustrations.” Population Research and Policy Review 17 (1998): 223-246.
24 Morrow, L., L. DeSipio, and R. De la Garza. The Latino Vote at Mid-Decade. Claremont, CA: The
Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1996.
25 Pardo, M. “Creating Community: Mexican American Women in Eastside Los Angeles.” Aztlan, 22
(1991)
26 Parker, H. R. “The Elusive Coalition: African American and Chicano Political Organization and
Interaction in Los Angeles, 1960-1973.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at Los Angeles, 1996.
27 Pastor, M. Latinos and the Los Angeles Uprising: The Economic Context (Summary Report)
Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1993.
28 Pastor, M. Latinos and the Los Angeles Uprising: The Economic Context (Full Report). Claremont,
CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1993.
29 Pincetl, S. “Challenges to Citizenship: Latino Immigrants and Political Organization in the Los
Angeles Area.” Environment and Planning, 26 (1994): 895-914.
30 Ramírez-Paredes, G. El Sistema Político Mexicano Visto por los Mexicanos de Afuera : (el Caso de la
Comunidad Mexicano-Chicana en el Estado de California. (The Mexican Political System as Seen by
Mexicans Abroad: The Case of the Mexican-Chicano Community in California.) Mexico, D.F.:
Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, Centro de Relaciones Internacionales, Universidad Nacional
Autónoma de México, 1991.
31 Rose Institute. Facts and Figures on California’s Latino Voters. Claremont, CA: The Rose Institute of
State and Local Government Claremont McKenna College, 1988.
32 Rose Institute. Latino Volunteer and Non-Profit Organizations. Claremont, CA: The Rose Institute of
State and Local Government Claremont McKenna College, 1988.
33 Santoli-Pardo, M. “Identity and Resistance: Mexican-American Women and Grassroots Activism in
two Los Angeles Communities.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at San Diego, 1990.
34 Skerry, P. Mexican Americans: The Ambivalent Minority. New York, NY: Free Press, 1993.
35 Skerry, P., and L. Magaña. Mexican Americans: Are They an Ambivalent Minority? Claremont, CA;
The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1994.
36 Solis, J., E. R. Forsysth, and D. Lopez-Lee One Voice, One Future: A Latino Funding Agenda from
the Latino Community and its Leadership. The Los Angeles County Latino Assessment Study
(LACLAS). Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1990.
37 Suarez-Orozco, M. “California Dreaming: Proposition 187 and the Cultural Psychology of Racial and
Ethnic Exclusion.” Anthropology & Education Quarterly 27 (1996): 151-167.
38 Takash, P. C. “Breaking Barriers to Representation: Chicana/Latina Elected Officials in California.”
Urban Anthropology and Studies of Cultural Systems and World Economic Development 22 (1993):
325-360.
39 The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Diversifying the Los Angeles Area Latino Mosaic: Salvadoran and
Guatemalan Leaders’ Assessments of Community Public Policy. Claremont, CA: NALEO Educational
Fund/The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1997.
27

40 The Tomás Rivera Policy Institute. Shaping American Foreign Relations: The Critical Role of the
Southwest (New American Global Dialogue Series). Claremont, CA: The Stanley Foundation and The
Tomás Rivera Policy Institute, 1995.
41 Tolbert, C. J., and R. E. Hero. “Race/Ethnicity and Direct Democracy: An Analysis of California
Illegal Immigration Initiative.” Journal of Politics 58 (1996): 806-818.
42 Tomás Rivera Policy Institute. Latinos, Global Change, and American Foreign Policy. (New
American Global Dialogue Series). Claremont, CA: The Stanley Foundation and The Tomás Rivera
Policy Institute, 1995.
43 Trueba, H. T., Healing Multicultural America : Mexican Immigrant’s Rise to Power in Rural
California. Washington, DC: Falmer Press, 1993.
44 Turner, L., and C. Allen. “Mexican and Latino Media Behavior in Los Angeles: The 1996 Election
Example.” The American Behavioral Scientist, 40 (1997).
45 Underwood, K. “Ethnicity is not Enough: Latino-led Multiracial Coalitions in Los Angeles.” Urban
Affairs Review 32 (1997).
46 Underwood, K. “Process and Politics: Multiracial Electoral Coalition Building and Representation in
Los Angeles’ Ninth District, 1949-1962.” Ph.D. diss., University of California at San Diego, 1992.
Poverty, Housing and Welfare Reform
1 Consroy, R. J., and D. M. Heer. Mexican Immigrant Homelessness Annual Meeting of the Pacific
Sociological Association, Conference. San Francisco, CA: Pacific Sociological Association, 1998.
2 Fix, M., and J. S. Passel. Trends in Noncitizens’ and Citizens’ Use of Public Benefits Following
Welfare Reform: 1994-97. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, 1999.
3 Fix, M., and L. Ku. Welfare Reform, the Economic and Health Status of Immigrants, and the
Organizations that Serve Them. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, 1997.
4 Flaming, D., M. Drayse, and P. Force. On the Edge: A Progress Report on Welfare to Work in Los
Angeles. Los Angeles, CA: Economic Roundtable, 1999.
5 Freedman, S., M. Mitchell, and D. Navarro. The Los Angeles Jobs-First GAIN Evaluation: Preliminary
Findings on Participation Patterns and First-Year Impacts. San Francisco, CA: Manpower
Demonstration Research Corporation, 1998.
6 Hayes-Bautista, D. “Poverty and the Underclass: Some Latino Crosscurrents.” In Reducing Poverty in
America. ed. M. Darby, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications 1996.
7 James, F. Persistent Urban Poverty and the Underclass: A Perspective Based on the Hispanic
Experience. Claremont, CA: The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, 1988.
8 McMurrer, D. P., I. V. Sawhill, and R. I. Lerman. Welfare Reform and Opportunity in the Low-
Wage Labor Market. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute, 1996.
9 Molina, E. M. “Social Networks Among the Inner City Homeless: Comparative
Study of Latino and African American Men.” Ph.D. diss., University California
28

Los Angeles, 1997.
10 Molina, M., A. Nelson, and F. Gallarzo Jr. Invisible Lives: Documenting and Analyzing Latina/o
Homelessness in East Los Angeles. Los Angeles, CA: University of California, 1995.
11 Moore, J., and R. Pinderhughes. In the Barrios: Latinos and the Underclass Debate. New York, NY:
Russell Sage Foundation, 1993.
12 Myers, D. How Are We Housed? Affordability, Overcrowding, and Achievement of Home
Ownership in Los Angeles From 1980 to 1990. Los Angeles, CA: Report 1993-1 City of Los Angeles
Housing Department, 1993.
13 Myers, D. Upward Mobility Through Los Angeles: Immigrants’ Trajectories of Location
and Poverty, 1980 to 2020. Los Angeles, CA: USC, Lusk Center Research Institute, 1997.
14 Myers, D., and S. W. Lee. “Immigrant Trajectories into Home Ownership: A Temporal Analysis of
Residential Assimilation.” International Migration Review 32 (1998): 593-625.
15 Myers, D., and S. Woo Lee. “Immigration Cohorts and Residential Overcrowding in Southern
California.” Demography 33 (1996): 55-61.
16 Myers, D., M. Yen, and L. Vidauri. Transportation, Housing, and Urban Planning Implications of
Immigration to Southern California. Los Angeles, CA: Research Report No. LCRI-96-04R, Lusk
Center Research Institute, School Urban Planning and Development University of Southern
California, 1996.
17 Ong, P., and E. Blumberg. Job Accessibility and Welfare Usage: Evidence from Los Angeles. Los
Angeles, CA:The Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies University of California at Los Angeles,
1997.
18 Scott, A. J. and E. R. Brown (editors). South-Central Los Angeles: Anatomy of an Urban Crisis
Working Paper. Los Angeles, CA: The Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies The University of
California at Los Angeles, 1993.
19 The National Council of La Raza. Hispanic Poverty: How Much Does Immigration Explain?
Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1990.
20 The National Council of La Raza On My Own: Mexican American Women, Self-Sufficiency, and the
Family Support Act, December 1990. Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1990.
21 The National Council of La Raza. Twenty-Two Hispanic Leaders Discuss Poverty. Washington, DC:
The National Council of La Raza, 1990.
22 The National Council of La Raza. Budget Cuts and Block Grants Issue Brief Washington, DC: The
National Council of La Raza, 1996.
23 The National Council of La Raza. Hispanic Child Poverty: Signs of Distress, Signs of Hope.
Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1990.
24 The National Council of La Raza. Testimony on the Impact of Welfare Reform on the Hispanic
Community. Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1995.
25 The National Council of La Raza. Testimony on the Implications of Welfare Reform for the Hispanic
Community. Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1993.
26 The National Council of La Raza. Welfare-to-Work Issue Brief. Washington, DC: The National
29

Council of La Raza, 1997.
27 The National Council of La Raza. For My Children: Mexican American Women, Work, and Welfare.
Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1992.
28 The National Council of La Raza. From JOBS to Careers: An Assessment of Latino Participation in
Ten States and Puerto Rico. Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1994.
29 The National Council of La Raza. Hunger and Poverty in the Hispanic Community. Washington, DC:
The National Council of La Raza Bread for the World Annual Report, 1993.
30 The National Council of La Raza. Statement on the Status and Needs of Hispanic Families and Youth
Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1991.
31 The National Council of La Raza. Testimony on the Recent Changes in the Poverty Rate and the
Distribution of Income. Washington, DC: The National Council of La Raza, 1992.
30

FOCUS GROUP REPORT
Center for the Study of Latino Health
UCLA School of Medicine
November 1998

UNITED WAY LATINO PROFILE PROJECT
Focus Group Top Line Memo
by
David E. Hayes-Bautista, PhD
Center for the Study of Latino Health
School of Medicine, UCLA
METHODOLOGY
The Research Committee convened during the summer of 1998, and
identified a number of areas of concern that could be addressed the Latino
Profile study. At the initial meetings, nearly 75 points of concern were
raised. These points were to be addressed in subsequent research.
Five Areas
The nearly 75 points raised by the advisory group were collapsed into five
main areas of inquiry:
· Building Community
· The Latino Economic Engine
· Convergences and Interactions
· Areas of Concern
· Latino Contributions to Los Angeles.
Focus Groups
The initial data collection effort was to be a series of focus groups, to
uncover patterns of Latino perceptions about these five areas. Eight focus
groups were held with distinctive sub-groupings of Latinos:
· Immigrants (2)
1

· US Born, high school graduate or less (Low Education) (3)
· US born, college attendance or more (High Education) (1)
· Business leaders (1)
· Civic leaders (1)
A focus group Discussion Guide was developed, and utilized for
facilitation. Focus groups were facilitated by a professional facilitator from
UCLA.
Data Analysis
The focus group data were analyzed using the Grounded Theory method
(Glaser and Strauss, 1967). The transcripts were read, and key phrases
identified that related to the respondents’ experiences with the five areas of
inquiry. Through a process of constant comparison and contrast, the key
phrases were grouped into categories that provided further detail on the
five areas of inquiry. These groupings became the sub-headings under each
area. The focus groups surfaced a number of issues within each one of these
areas of inquiry.
BUILDING COMMUNITY
Focus group participants described a number of ways in which they
perceived Latinos to be part of the community building effort of greater Los
Angeles.
Latino Emergence.
For many years, the Latino community has been a small, powerless,
relatively ignored minority, whose political and economic power, and role
in the general public consciousness, was far less that other minority groups
in the region. Within a short period of time, that role has changed.
Growth in Numbers. The simple demographic fact is that the Latino
population of Los Angeles county has grown impressively, from less than 1
million in 1970 to more than 4.0 million by 1996. The change was described
2

y focus group participants in many ways, starting with an overall increase
in numbers
-Particularly [during] the last ten years, I think that Latinos have
established themselves all over Los Angeles.
The growth in numbers was perceived as being, in large part, the result of
the immigration surge of the 1980s and 1990s:
-Over the last ten years we’ve seen an influx of a large immigrant
population.
As will be seen below, the increase in immigration, while perceived as
creating the current Latino sense of power, also brought with it a number of
intra-Latino concerns.
Inevitability of Latino influence. In contrast to perceptions of ten or
twenty years ago, participants described a feeling that Latinos have
achieved a great amount of influence in the daily life of Los Angeles.
-It’s a fact that we are now coming into positions of power.
The positions of power are described in more detail below, as stemming
from demographic growth coupled with economic and political activities.
Not only has the influence grown, it was described as continuing to grow
until Latinos have a major voice, perhaps a dominant one, in the affairs of
the region. Further, this growth was described by some respondents as
being nearly inevitable.
-[It] is inevitable that there will be a Latino power base here, that is
going to be running this place.
Proposition 187 as turning point. Each focus group described, in varying
amounts of detail, the effects of 187 on the Latino community. While most
Latino immigrants were not “undocumented immigrants” during that
3

debate, the very wide net cast by political advertisements and political
debates during the period of “immigrant bashing” was described by legal
permanent residents as being perceived as aimed at them.
-El gobierno si nos ha marginado en ese aspecto, al Latino, porque
nos ha puesto en un status diferente a los demas, aunque estemos
legalmente aqui. (The government has marginalized us in this
aspect, the Latino, because the government has put us in a different
status than everyone else, even though we are legally here.)
The U.S. Born Latinos felt they, too, were the target of Proposition 187.
Even though they were not technically illegal immigrants ( in fact, were not
immigrants at all, but U.S. citizens by reason of birth), they perceived the
policy debate to be about Latino presence in society, rather than merely the
presence of undocumented immigrants.
-[Proposition 187] was telling us that we no longer belonged here.
-You sense that there’s a race card, that, ‘Oh, it’s because they’re
undocumented’. There is no Latino mentioned.
The negative effects were described as attempts to thwart the growth of
Latino influence.
-Estan poniendo muchas leyes que estan truncando a que el Latino
pueda superarse. (They are passing many laws which are interfering
with the Latino from progressing.)
For all the feelings of rejection caused by Proposition 187, there were a
number of positive effects. As the pro-Proposition 187 communications
were perceived by respondents as being aimed at the entire Latino
community, and not just undocumented immigrants, the larger Latino
community, including the US born as well as the immigrant, reacted to
those messages.
-187 woke us up to ourselves as a community, and it made us aware
4

that, yeah, we do contribute socially, economically, politically, and
everything else to this community.
For years, the Latino political electorate was disproportionately small,
because of the presence of large numbers of legal permanent resident
immigrants in the voting age population, who, until this point, had been
extremely reluctant to become naturalized U.S. Citizens. In the 1980 census,
less than 17% of Mexican immigrants had become naturalized citizens.
However, the public discussion around Proposition 187 motivated the legal
permanent residents to become citizens, in unprecedented numbers. Once
they were naturalized, they were able to express their concern about the
tone of the Proposition 187 debate by registering and voting.
-At the same time, they have benefitted us in terms of getting people
to register themselves as citizens...and getting out the vote.
For all the pain and discomfort caused by Proposition 187, it was also
described as having been a painful benefit for the Latino community, in
that it galvanized that community into action. Yet, regret was expressed
that it took such a drastic, negative and divisive action to create the
subsequent actions.
-It is unfortunate, for example, that it takes Proposition 187 to get
Latinos to become citizens, to get Latinos to go and vote.
Vision for Los Angeles
Older respondents remembered the days of segregated schools and public
amenities. Younger respondents remember very vividly the antiimmigrant,
anti-affirmative action and anti-bilingual education measures of
the 1990s. Descriptions of the assumption of Latino power included
concerns about providing a larger, more comprehensive vision of the future
that would appeal to non-Latinos as well as to Latinos.
-We, as an emerging power, Latinos, ought to be inclusive of other
diverse groups, as we continue to build that power.
5

Because of the past history of “identity politics”, in which a political agenda
often defined a group, there was concern described that Latinos need move
beyond an ethnic agenda, to a larger state-wide agenda.
-The challenge is, how do we as Latinos, when we see the emerging
Latino power, prove to non-Latinos that we are inclusive? That we
will embrace their values and concerns?
Perceptions of Opportunity
Focus group respondents described the area of Los Angeles as offering a
plethora of opportunities. In particular, immigrant participants described
the area as offering the opportunity to grow and develop individually, as
well as to rise economically.
-Para mi significa llegar a lo que tu puedas hacer con las
oportunidades que se te ofrecen. (For me it signifies that you reach to
were you can go with the opportunities that are offered to you.)
-Si uno se quiere superar, y le echa ganas, siempre va a poder hacer
bien y progresar en su vida. (If one wishes to further oneself and
gives it their all, then good will always be done and one will always
progress in life.)
In spite of the recent economic downturn, Los Angeles was perceived as
offering job opportunities.
-You can find any type of job. Just qualify yourself for it, and there is
always a job.
Obstacles to Opportunity
Yet, for all the optimism about the area, participants did see a number of
obstacles that stood in their way to these opportunities. These will be
6

developed in greater depth below, in the section on concerns. However, a
preview will be useful here.
Immigrant participants described the barriers in terms of recent public
policy debates that would limit immigrant and/or Latino access to
opportunities.
-Los medios nos dicen muchas veces, ‘Sabes que, no puedes abrirte
camino por este lado, sino que mejor quedate como constructor...no
puedes superarte para ser un maestro, para ser un doctor’. (The
media tell us many times “ You know what, you can not go down
that path, stay as a construction worker...you can not progress and
become a teacher, to become a doctor.”)
The greatest barrier described by Immigrant Latinos for their children was
a non-supportive educational system
-A mi me preocupa que muchos de los ninos de Los Angeles no estan
obteniendo la mejor educacion que deberian de obtener. (I am
worried that the children of Los Angeles are not receiving the best
education that they should be getting.)
Similar to the Immigrant Latinos, Civic and Business Leader Latinos, like
US Born College Latinos, described the opportunities in great macro-level
detail, and saw the barriers in terms of recent public policy decisions that
would impede Latino access to education and decision making power.
-The system that is not helping us may be [doing so] deliberately, in
order to stop us [from] taking over.
US Born Non-College described, in great detail, internal barriers,
internalized senses of no longer being able to compete for opportunities
because of a loss of self confidence.
-A lot of [Latino] people, their expectations about life, about
7

everything in general, is real low.
-I think that we as a community don’t value ourselves a whole lot.
-A lot of Latin people, we don’t feel that we qualify.
THE LATINO ECONOMIC ENGINE
Latinos as Work Force
Respondents in all the focus groups described the tremendous work ethic
as a key factor in the Latino Economic Engine. Latinos workers were
described as hard working, willing to take on any job, and a stable
underpinning for the rest of the economic activity in the region.
-El Latino es el que mas trabaja, y nadie se da cuenta. (The Latino
is the one that works the most and no one acknowledges it.)
-I think that’s a major contribution, that the labor is provided by
Latinos.
-There is the saying that if every one of us [Latinos] took the day
off...we would [all] be in trouble, much more so.
Latinos as a Market
The growth of the Latino market was described by participants. The sheer
number of Latinos has made this market segment difficult to overlook.
-We have no choice but to do our business in Spanish if we want to
retain our consumer market.
Increased attention paid to the Latino consumer market was indexed by the
numbers and types of commercials that were obviously aimed at Latino
consumers.
8

-You see commercials now that you wouldn’t see before...with
values and cultural traditions...addressed in these commercials.
Respondents mentioned the now common-knowledge that the #1 television
news program in Spanish, and that the #1 radio station likewise broadcasts
in Spanish.
Latinos as Entrepreneurs
Participants also described their perceptions of rapid increases in the
number of Latino owned businesses, even in areas where there had been
previously very little economic activity.
-You go down Broadway...from here, down to 120th street, and you
go now and it is thriving, you see stores, you see cafeterias, you see
people on the streets.
Immigrant Latinos, in particular, were described as having a keen sense of
entrepreneurship.
-They [Latino immigrants] are very much an entrepreneurial
community, so what they’ve done is that they brought that culture,
they brought that entrepreneurship over to the U.S.
The Latino Economy
The growth of the Latino consumer base and the Latino owned business
was described as constituting a parallel economy, linked to, but somewhat
independent of, the non-Latino economy.
-The Latino economy of Los angeles is separate from the general
economy, at the same time it’s combined. It’s almost like analyzing
two different economies.
The real estate market was described as an indicator of the resilience, and
independence, of the Latino economy.
9

-In the years we were having a recession, the Latinos were not
having a recession. Housing wasn’t down, housing sales were very
prosperous, people were making money, they kept on supporting
community retailers.
As producers, consumers and sellers, Latinos described the Latino
Economic Engine as an integral part of the overall economic picture.
CONVERGENCES AND INTERACTIONS
Los Angeles was described by participants as a place of many types of
diversity. Diversity offered many opportunities, and many potentials for
conflict.
Cultural Diversity
The cultural mosaic living in the area was vividly described by participants.
-[Los Angeles] means diversity, so many different races living in one
place...it’s diverse, it’s great.
-No hay la misma cantidad de gente de otras partes del mundo como
aqui en Los Angeles. (No other place than Los Angeles can you find
the same amount of people that come from different parts of the
world.)
Convergence with Cultural Diversity
Residential Convergence. The sheer size of the Latino population has
made it impractical to think in terms of a single “barrio” or “colonia’ where
most Latinos once lived. Rather, Latinos have become dispersed nearly all
over Los Angeles, such that few areas do not have significant Latino
populations.
-When I barely moved here, there was a lot of Caucasian people. And
10

over the years, more and more Latinos are coming into my
community.
Latinos moved into many areas that had only seen population declines,
including aging White Non Hispanic and African American residential
areas.
-[Immigrant Latinos] have been very significant in terms of how
they’re impacting a lot of smaller cities. They have moved into these
cities such as Compton,Bell, where the housing was cheaper.
Middle Class Dreams. A convergence in the aspiration to middle class
standards of living was described as a commonality shared by the various
groups in the region.
-I see a thirst from the Latino community to be better, to have a better
life, to want things, to desire things.
As Latinos moved out from small barrios, they felt the same desires as
their non-Latino new neighbors.
-Queremos una casa, queremos tener un buen trabajo, queremos que
nuestros hijos vayan a la universidad. ( We want a house, we want
to have a good job, we want our children to go to the university.)
Interacting with One Another. Once living cheek-by-jowl with new
neighbors, interactions of various began to take place, almost inevitably.
-I’m sitting here thinking that I don’t live for existence [only] in the
Latino world. I’m part of a very diverse community.
Learning From One Another. Latinos living in diverse neighborhoods
described a process of mutual cultural learning. Sometimes, Latinos learned
from their neighbors about their neighbors’ cultures
11

-If I meet somebody, I like to know about their culture. I like to know
why they think that way, why they feel that way, why they know the
things the way they do.
-Queremos saber de los indios de la India, queremos saber de los
Indios nativos de aqui, queremos saber de los judios, queremos saber
mas, hasta inclusive de la raza negra. ( We want to know more about
the Indians from India, we want to know more about the Native
Americans, we want to know more about the Jews, we want to know
more, even about the Black race.)
In return, their neighbors were described as learning from them, and a
mutual cultural learning emerges.
-Ellos [Americanos] conocen de nuestra cultura, y nosotros
adentramos cada dia mas a la de ellos. (They (Americans) know
about our culture, and we are adapting more to theirs.)
Cooperating With One Another. Participants described situations in which
they and their neighbors cooperated with one another in various ways.
-Ya los Latinos nos juntamos con los americanos, hacemos proyectos
juntos. (Now the Latinos are interacting more with the Americans,
we are doing projects together.)
-Both next door neighbors are Anglos...and we do each other favors.
They go, we look out for their house, we take care of their mail, take
care of their dog...and vice versa.
Conflict with One Another
Such proximity and difference of culture can, at times, lead to conflict.
Such conflicts were also described by respondents.
-It’s pretty peaceful. I don’t see it as bad, but there is tension among
12

these communities, the African Americans and the Latinos. Not
much, but you can tell that there is.
-Es muy dificil ser Latino...si tenemos nuestros choques con otras
personas, no solo blancas, sino de otro color. (It is very difficult to
be a Latino...Yes we do have conflict with other people, not only
with the whites, but also with other colored people.)
-We’re seeing the next school board race already be a divisive one,
because of the issue of Latino-Jewish politics getting in the way.
In these conflicts, Latinos described the feeling of getting the poor end of
the conflicts.
-Siempre somos un poquito empujados afuera. (We are always
pushed aside a little bit.)
Intra-Latino Diversity
As recently as 1970, Latinos in Los Angeles were primarily second and
third generation U.S. Born of Mexican origin. The sudden growth in
population size, fueled by immigration, brought a great amount of intra-
Latino diversity. While the intra-Latino diversity brought about many of
the positive changes observed above, it has also brought about new
concerns and potential conflicts.
Recent Latino Diversity . The sudden diversification of the Latino
population has occurred within the past twenty years.
-One of the changes that has happened specifically in the Latino
community is...at one point [it] was predominantly Mexican-
American, now you have a real diversity of Latinos from all over
Latin America.
Types of Latino Diversity. The diversity of Latinos was described in many
different ways. One way described in detail was by national origin: Latinos
13

are now longer solely of Mexican descent.
-When I cam here from El Paso, I didn’t know the difference between
Salvadoran, Guatelamalan, I didn’t know anything. To me, they all
looked the same.
Another type of diversity was by social class. Whereas once, Latinos were
more homogeneous in terms of income and education, there has been a
greater diversity because of greater access to opportunity.
-I would go to the Latino Business Expo and...meet all these people
in suits and todos son Latinos and ‘Wow, we’re really doing great.’
And I’ll drive by Lynwood, and I’m still seeing drive-by shootings.
The variety of diversity was perhaps best summed up by one respondent.
-It’s so diverse...we have different professionals here, different
backgrounds, some of us were born here, some weren’t, some are
second generation. Even within the same family you have different
levels of education, of economic standing, and so on.
Challenges of Intra-Latino Diversity
Just as with the larger inter-cultural diversity, respondents attempted to
define a situation of both similarities and differences.
-We always make the assumption that we’re [Latinos] very similar.
There is similarities, but there’s also a lot of differences we have to
recognize.
While there were both similarities and differences, respondents described
an ideal state where both the similarities and the differences could be
respected.
-We’re all Latinos, and we should help each other, and [yet] there’s
always that little, ‘Well, you’re from Mexico and we’re from Central
14

America or South America.’
There was recognition that the intra-Latino diversity creates both
opportunities and the potential for conflict.
-A diversity of Latinos has brought a lot of issues, a lot of challenges,
but at the same time, a lot of opportunities for all of us to work
together.
In the ideal state, where differences create a gap, there should an ability to
bridge that gap.
-As civic leaders, I think we all think of it as part of our
responsibility to educate, to bridge that gap [between US born and
Immigrant].
AREAS OF CONCERN
In addition to describing their perceptions of opportunity in the economy
and diversity of Los Angeles, participants also voiced a number of concerns
and cautions that they perceived interfering with their full participation.
Some of the concerns came the external environment, while others were
internal to the Latino community.
Externally Generated Concerns
Negative Media Image. Respondents in each group described concern over
the constant, negative media images of Latinos. This negative image was
described as feeding into and perpetuating stereotypes of Latinos as a
dysfunctional community.
-Mira las noticias. Puro negativo, nada positivo. (Look at the news.
Everything is negative, nothing is positive.)
-I have hosted many people from [corporate America] who are afraid
to come to L.A....because they fear what they have seen in the paper.
15

They fear they’re going to be carjacked, they’re going to be shot,
they’re going to be robbed.
-Me preocupa el nivel de penetracion de los medios masivos
para perpetuar estereotipos de Latinos. (I worry about the
extent to which the mass media will perpetuate the Latino
stereotype.)
-[The negative image is that] parents are never home, they don’t care
about their children, they never get involved in school, all the Latino
youths are either in gangs or doing drugs. I mean, they will literally
think that most girls are going to end up with teenage pregnancy
problems.
Unreadiness for Change. That Latino emergence was recent was not lost
on respondents, who described how non-Latinos might not be ready to
accept the changes that have already occurred.
-In Miami...the Latino community, principally Cubans, have really
become a far more important part of the entire community than Los
Angeles.
An indicator of unreadiness for change, described by the participants was
the gap between an institution’s rhetoric and its actual behavior.
-In the LAUSD you have student bodies that are primarily Latino,
and the administration is Anglo.
-I am the most concerned about corporate America and corporate
greater Los Angeles, because I hear the spiel that ‘we’re committed
to diversity’...and nothing has happened.
Fear of Change. Participants described a fear they sense among non-
Latinos about the recent demographic shifts.
-La Union Americana tiene miedo de que el Latino se supere, se
16

organice y llegue a tomar algun dia las riendas del poder.
(America is afraid that the Latino will progress, that the Latino
will organize, and one day become powerful.)
-I think some of the fear of the white people I hang around with is
that they fear the unknown. They really have no idea of the values of
Latino culture...they see us as strangers, not American apple pie.
-We have ‘taken over’ according to the Anglo, you know.
Resistance to Change. Slightly more accentuated than fear of change was
active resistance to change described by participants.
-There is a very large resistance to what is already true, which is
Latino power.
-[Cultural diversity] is happening, but with a lot of resistance and a
lot of resentment by many people.
-I think, for some people, they are in denial about changes that are
happening, because they are so drastic and they’re coming up so fast.
Backlash to Change. The most extreme reaction to the changes described
by respondents was outright backlash. Many of the measures of the 1990s,
such as Proposition 187 were perceived as part of a non-Latino backlash. A
number of possible concerns were described as motivating the backlash:
immigration; too many Latinos; Latinos too successful; Latinos becoming
too powerful.
-There’s a sense that ‘What we used to have, they [Latinos] start
taking away from us’.
-They’re trying to retain what used to be...Latinos, mostly Mexicans
were properly humble and downtrodden, and accepted their lives.
-El Latino quiere superarse, pero le ponen que ‘Si no tienes esta
17

tarjeta, no puedes ir a la escuela’. (The Latino wants to progress,
but they say “If you do not have this card, you can not go to
school.”)
Internally Generated Concerns
Some types of concerns were seen as being, at least partially, within the
purview of Latinos to change.
Education. Given the higher Latino fertility, it is not surprising that many
parents were present as participants in the focus groups and described their
concerns for their children. Parents described greater concern for their
children’s hopes, dreams and opportunities than for their own. Education
was described as the most important concern.
-The most important things in the Latino community have to do with
education and economic power.
-Si no [se educan] cuando ellos crezcan, no van a estar lo
suficientemente preparados para poder sobrevivr y obtener un
trabajo y vivir comodamente. (If they do not [educate
themselves], then when they grow up, they will not be
sufficiently prepared to obtain a job, to live comfortably,to
survive)
-I think, honestly, education is probably the best investment.
-Tiene que haber un camino porque viene atras
generaciones...nuestros hijos. Hay muchos caminos cerrados
para nosotros los adultos, pero de nosotros los adultos depende
que esa luz [de esperanza] se haga mas grande, hay un rayito
enmedio. (There has to be a pathway because there are new
generations that are coming...our children. There are many
pathways that are closed to us, the adults. It is up to us, the
adults, that the light [of hope] becomes bigger, since at the
moment there is only a small light in the middle.)
18

Low Self Esteem, Low Self Confidence. A low self esteem, mentioned
above, was described as becoming an internal barrier to Latino
advancement.
-Our expectations are low.
-I didn’t feel up to the [promotion]. My expectations were low.
-When our people came across the border, agachados, we wanted to
ask. ‘Who is the patron around here so can obey them?’
By contrast, other Latino groups, particularly Cubans in Miami, were
described as having much higher expectations of themselves
-When the Cubans arrived in Miami, they thought they had the right
to run the place. And this is a mindset. ‘Patron? Bullshit! We own the
place!’.
One source of low expectations described was the school setting. Numerous
examples of students being discouraged were provided.
-Cuando yo estuve in high school aqui, los mismos
consejeros...nada mas nos decian ‘Bueno, ya acabste la high
school ya, vete, busca trabajo.’ (When I was in high school, the
counselors would only say to us, “Well, you are now finished
with high school, go and find yourself a job.)
-[Los consejeros dicen] ‘Tu no puedes estudiar para contador,
no puedes estudiar para abogado’. ([The counselors say] “You
can’t study to become a construction worker, you can’t study to
become a lawyer.)
U.S. Born described immigrants as having a higher expectations and better
self esteem than they did.
19

-Immigrant...students who come here are so eager to learn...so
outgoing...so self oriented, you know their initiative is there, they’re
doing better than the second and third generation Mexican
American.
Second and third generation low education respondents described
themselves as having lost part of their initiative, in a sense internalizing the
discouragement they found in their schools
-The Chicanos are the ones that are saying,’Oh, it’s not good to go to
college. Who are they, and why are they [immigrants] trying to be
better than me?’
Adolescent Problems. While not occurring exclusively among Latino
adolescents, a number of concerns that were perceived to
disproportionately affect Latinos were described.
Youth violence. The potential for violent behavior was described as a
concern.
-[I] fear for my family, I’m in the car and when you pass although
Lennox, you know, that’s a highly populated cholo area, or gang
related.
-I’m consistently saddened by the level of violence in our own
communities.
Teen pregnancies. Concern about the number of teen pregnancies
and their effects on the futures of both mothers and children were
described.
-The other thing that has surprised me tremendously...[about Latino
teens is] the high pregnancy rate, not that it is a judgement, because
certainly it is not, but I’ve seen the challenge they have before them.
Latino identity. In 1970, most Latinos in the Los Angeles area were English
20

dominant, second and third generation, with little knowledge of Mexico or
Latin America. The arrival of a large number of immigrant adults changed
the cultural context of Latino Los Angeles. Spanish became a viable
medium of communication; Spanish language television and radio outlets
multiplied; recording artists from Mexico City, Caracas and Buenos Aires
began to make stops in Los Angeles during their tours; tortillas in a wide
variety become increasingly available in food stores, and strange new foods
such as pupusas began to make their appearance.
Literally, a new Latino culture sprang up around the U.S. Born Latinos who
had lived in the area in 1970. This change in population and culture created
some intra-Latino dynamics that were described.
Being Latino Not Validated. Older respondents were able to describe
their childhood, a time of greater formal segregation, where being
identified as Latino brought social sanctions with it.
-My mother...is angry and hurt because they went through a lot. I
mean, she couldn’t even go to the plunge [swimming pool] in
Monrovia on White Days. She had to go on Black Day. And my
mother’s lighter than me. But because she was a Mexican, she had to
sit in certain places on the bus, she could only go swimming on
certain days.
This was a time when they were punished if they were “caught’ speaking
Spanish at school, when things Latino were denigrated.
-In high school...you wanted not to speak Spanish and [teachers
would] punish us...I didn’t want to hang around anybody that spoke
Spanish.
-Being Mexican was a bad thing.
-The reality was that being Latino meant you had to hide the aspects
of your Latino [self].
21

Compounding the active invalidation was a passive, studied ignorance of
things Latino.
-Out here in the LAUSD they don’t teach you about Hispanic
heritage at all. It’s mostly all American heritage.
As a result, many older US Born Latinos grew up knowing very little, if
anything about Latino and latin American culture.
-My great-grandma was born in Mexico, but I don’t know anything
about it.
-Supposedly I’m Mexican heritage, but I don’t know anything about
it. I don’t know anything about the Aztecs or anything.
As a further result, these older US Born Latinos described a void in their
identity.
-I don’t have anything to say, ‘This is me.’ I don’t know who I am as
far as culture.
Immigrant Latinos did not describe such identity voids. If anything they
described feeling perplexed when US Born Latinos would express
ignorance about the Spanish language, about history, or about their feelings
of identity.
-These [Mexican American] folks that are complaining about us
[Immigrant Latinos] now were some of the very ones that were
punished for speaking Spanish.
-The American born Latino lived a different reality that we would
like [prefer] to live.
Us Born Latinos, especially in the low education focus groups, described
feelings of frustration, that somehow they were no longer sufficiently
Latino, yet never felt completely “American”.
22

-[Immigrant Latinos] well, they’re making me feel like, you know, I’m
not a Mexican
-In high school...I wanted to be able to identify with...the other
Mexican girls... but I couldn’t identify with White girls either.
Language. Older US Born Latinos described growing up not being
able to speak Spanish. Now, both other Latinos and Anglos will often
assume that because they are Latino, they must know Spanish. This causes
continuing concern about their identity.
-When I go to Mexico, they speak to me in English. When I’m here,
they speak to me in Spanish.
-Now I have somebody who comes and speaks Spanish to me and
makes me feel, ‘Oh, you can’t even speak your own language’. But
that wasn’t my language. My language was English.
-They’ll say, ‘Well, how come you don’t speak Spanish” You’re a
Mexican, aren’t you?’ And I just tell them, ‘But I was born here’.
Validation of Being Latino. For all the bumps between US Born and
Immigrant Latinos over the issues of identity,language and culture, there is
one positive outcome described by US born Latinos: it is now socially
acceptable to be Latino.
-You know, now it’s OK to be a Mexican. Now it’s OK, but back in
the 40s and the 50s it was not.
-Well, I think it’s better now. I mean, it’s OK to be a Mexican, it’s OK
to be Hispanic now. You know, in the sixties, I did feel that it was not
OK.
-It’s real easy to live here now, and speak Spanish.
23

Immigrant Latinos and High Education US born Latinos expressed a need
to re-empower Latinos with their identity.
-You can be a Latino, and keep doing that, and live here very
successfully, as opposed to have to hide it or lose it.
-We’ve got to do the job of re-integrating those folks with what it
really means to be an empowered Latinos.
LATINO CONTRIBUTIONS
Work Ethic. The contribution described in greatest detail was the labor
force contributions of Latinos.
-El Latino agarra housekeeping, el Latino agarra para ir a
limpiar doo-doo de los perros, el Latino agarra jardineria, name
it, el latino lo agarra. (The Latino does housekeeping, the Latino
goes and cleans the dogs doo-doo, the Latino does
gardening,Latinos do jobs.)
Economic Revitalization. The economic turnaround in Los Angeles is
perceived to be, in good part, a Latino contribution
-If you go down Figueroa, you see a revitalized, thriving
neighborhood, there’s a lot of mom and pop entrepreneurs, a lot of
economic activity.
-[I] just [go] through these streets and [see] that entrepreneurial
spirit, how dynamic a community can be. And you think, ‘Wait
a minute. This is the future of L.A.
Family. A characteristic mentioned as being part of Latino culture is a
strong family structure ideal.
24

-We brought the family philosophy to LA, I think we continue to
carry that. I think we influence a lot of people who are not Latinos on how
to really cultivate the family.
Roots of Los Angeles. That Los Angeles has deep Latino roots was
described as a contribution.
-All the words, all the street names are Mexican
-Who built L.A. to start off with?
NEXT STEPS
Focus groups findings are useful to probe respondents’ perceptions of
events. However, focus groups findings cannot be generalized out into the
entire population. While we know that U.S. Born Low Education Latinos
described a sense of low expectations and self confidence, we do not know
what percent of them do--does 80% or 15 feel that way?--and we do not
know if other groups felt this way, but the topic simply never came up in
discussion.
A population-based survey will allow the distribution of these perceptions
over the population. The next step from here is to operationalize these
findings into questionnaire items that can be included in the survey. Only
after a representative sample has been queried can we begin to understand
the distribution of these concerns, and their salience, to the entire
population of Latinos in Los Angeles.
25

SURVEY DATA
Center for the Study of Latino Health
UCLA School of Medicine
November 1999

SURVEY METHODOLOGY
The survey was administered by telephone between September and December 1999 both
in English and Spanish. The total number of completed interviews was 1,019 of which
150 were US born Latino, 318 immigrant Latino, 203 Non-Hispanic White, 201 African
American and 147 English speaking Asian/Pacific Islander. Out of the 1019 completed
interviews, 301 were completed by the UCLA Institute for Social Science Research and
the remaining 718 were completed by Juarez and Associates, Inc.
All sampling was conducted by means of random digit dialing techniques, which gives all
telephone households in each sample an equal chance of being included in the survey.
One eligible person 18 years or older was interviewed in each household.
Results from the overall sample (1,019) have a sampling error of +/- 3 percentage points
at the 95% confidence level. The sampling error for the smaller samples increases: the
US Latino sample has an error of +/-8, the immigrant Latino +/-6, the Non-Hispanic
White +/- 7, the African American +/- 7 and the English Speaking Asian/Pacific Islander
+/- 8 percentage points.
For questions about survey data, please contact:
CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF LATINO HEALTH AND CULTURE
UCLA School of Medicine
924 Westwood Blvd. Suite 730
Los Angeles, CA 90024
(310) 794-3095
(310) 794-2862 FAX
www.med.ucla.edu/cesla

SURVEY HIGHLIGHTS
Building Strong Communities
Participation in Community Activities
U.S.-born Latinos participate in community activities such as neighborhood
organizations, sports and children’s school activities at nearly the same rate as other
groups, with immigrant Latinos demonstrating somewhat lower participation. The
exception is church involvement, which was somewhat higher for immigrants than other
groups.
Belong to group, club or organization
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
US
Latino
IM
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Voter Registration
Overall, Latinos and Asians reported the lowest rate of voter registration; however,
among U.S.-born Latinos 80% reported being registered to vote -- similar to Whites and
African Americans -- compared to 20% for Latino immigrants.
Registered to Vote
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
US
Latino
IM
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
1

Emerging Influence
More Latinos than other groups agreed that very soon, Latinos will be running Los
Angeles. A noticeable difference was that more non-Latinos responded to this question “I
don’t know.”
Very soon, Latinos will be running Los Angeles
80%
60%
40%
Don't Know
20%
0%
US
Latino
IM
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
Values
All ethnic groups in Los Angeles share similar values regarding the need for individuals
to be financially self-sufficient rather than depending on government support.
Children should be taught not to depend on
government for support
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
2

Health Insurance
Latinos reported the highest level of health insurance non-coverage. About 40% of immigrant
Latinos had no health insurance, with U.S.-born Latinos having about the same rate of health
insurance as other ethnic groups.
No-Health Insurance: Pay Medical bill by self
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
US
Latino
IM
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Fueling the Economic Engine
Improving Communities
Latinos and African Americans agree that Latinos have improved run-down areas by
buying homes and starting businesses in various communities in and around Los Angeles.
Whites have a higher “don’t know” level than other groups.
Latinos have improved run down areas by
buying homes and starting businesses there
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Latino NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Don't Know
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
3

Bright Futures
Strong agreement was found among Latinos and other groups that there is opportunity for
Latino businesses to succeed in Los Angeles.
There are a lot of opportunities for Latino businesses to
succeed in L.A.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
0%
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Latinos and other ethnic groups all felt that there is opportunity for them as individuals in
Los Angeles.
There is a lot of opportunity for me in L.A.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
0%
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
4

Better Business Through Understanding
Latinos are most likely to feel that businesses sell better to the Latino market when they
make an effort to learn about Latino culture, with non-Latinos having a higher “don’t
know” rate.
Businesses sell to the Latino market better when they
learn about Latino culture
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Don't Know
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
Strong Work Ethic
All ethnic groups agreed that Latino immigrants are hard workers, and tended to disagree
with the notion that immigrant Latinos lower wages for everyone.
Immigrant Latinos are hard workers
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
0%
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
5

Glass Ceiling
Non-Latino groups are less likely to be aware of or agree that Latinos encounter a glass ceiling in
being blocked from achieving high positions in corporations.
Latinos encounter difficulty achieving high
positions in corporations
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Somewhat Agree
Strong Agree
Don't Know
Media Image
A majority of US-born Latinos feel that the media portrayal of Latinos is offensive. This view is
shared by nearly 40% of other ethnic groups.
The media's portrayal of Latinos is offensive
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
US
Latino
IM
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Don't Know
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
6

Learning for Life
Proud to Be an American
A large number of Latinos feel proud to be American, indicating a substantial increase
from previous survey results.
I am proud to be an American
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
US IM
Latino Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
Comfort With Diversity
Most Angelenos like Los Angeles’ ethnic diversity, even while being aware of ethnic
tensions.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
There is tension between Latinos
and Whites in L.A.
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Don't Know
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
7

Comfort With Diversity – Cont.
There is tension between Latinos
and Asians in L.A.
80%
60%
40%
20%
Don't know
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
0%
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
There is tension between Latinos
and Blacks in L.A.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Don't Know
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
8

All ethnic groups tend to agree that Latinos are accepted in Los Angeles more today than
in the past.
Latinos are accepted in Los Angeles today
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
US IM
Latino Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
Immigration
Immigration policy is perhaps a less divisive issue than might be assumed. All groups, except
Latino immigrants, have nearly the same level of acceptance of unrestricted immigration to the
US.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Latino immigrants should be allowed into
US without restrictions
US
Latino
IM
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
9

Multilingual Los Angeles
Angelenos of all ethnic groups recognize the value multilingual skills for success in Los
Angeles. Parents of all groups say that they want their children to learn both English and
Spanish.
In order to succeed in L.A. it is important to speak
more than one language
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
0%
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Parents agree: I want my child to speak Spanish
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
US
Latino
IM
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
10

New Technologies
All groups agree that computer skills are important. Latinos tend to have more access to
computer technology and the Internet in an educational context rather than at work or
home.
It is essential for children to learn
how to use computers
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
US
Latino
IM
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
Academic Success
Latino parents tend to feel that they are at fault if their children don’t succeed in school,
even though expressing the belief that many teachers have negative views of their
children’s abilities
100%
80%
Most Latino children are not succeeding
in school
60%
40%
20%
0%
US
Latino
IM
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Don't Know
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
11

Academic Success – Cont.
100%
Many school teachers have negative attitudes
towards Latino children
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
US IM
Latino Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Don't Know
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
Latinos express concern about their children’s academic failure to a greater extent than
other groups.
It is largely the parents fault if Latino children
are not succeeding in school #20
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
US
Latino
IM
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
12

Most people in Los Angeles acknowledge that a High School diploma is not enough in
today’s job market.
100%
80%
60%
A high school dipolma is not enough
in today's job market
40%
20%
0%
US
Latino
IM
Latino
NH
White
Afr
Amer
A/PI
Strong Agree
Somewhat Agree
13

STUDY ID#: 2133 SUMMER, 1999
LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY SURVEY
CASE ID:__________ V1
DATE:____________ V2_1/V2_2/V2_3
TIME START:______ V3
INT. ID#:__________ V4
LOG:_______
EDIT:_______
CODE:______
ENTER:_____
I’d like to start the interview by asking you a few questions about how you spend your leisure
time.
1. What is you favorite sport either to watch or play? (CIRCLE ONE ANSWER ONLY)
BASEBALL……………………….……….. 1
BASKETBALL……………………………..2
BOXING…………………………………… 3
FOOTBALL………………………... ………4
SOCCER…………………………………… 5
WRESTLING……………………………….6
OTHER (SPECIFY________________)..….7
NONE/DON’T LIKE SPORTS……. ………0
V5
V5TXT
2. What do you do with your family for recreation? (IF R SAYS “NO FAMILY” ASK
WHAT DOES R DO FOR RECREARION. CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY)
BACK YARD ACTIVITIES………………………..1
GO TO ATHLETIC EVENTS……………………... 2
GO TO BEACH/PIER/PORT……………………… 3
GO TO AMUSEMENT PARKS……………………4
GO TO MOVIES/CONCERTS/PLAYS/ETC……...5
PICNICS…………………………………………….1
PLAY SPORTS……………………………………..2
TAKE DRIVES/TRAVEL………………………….3
VISIT FRIENDS/RELATIVES…………………….4
WORK ON HOBBIES……………………………...5
RESTAURANTS/CLUBS…………………………. 1
WATCH TELEVISION…………………………….2
PLAY CARDS/GAMES…………………………… 3
V6
V7
V8
V9
V10
V11
V12
V13
V14
V15
V16
V17
V18
OTHER (SPECIFY________________)…………...4 V19 V19TXT
1

3. Next I would like to ask your opinion on a number of things. I will read you a series of
statements. After I read each one I would like you to tell me if you agree strongly, agree
somewhat, disagree somewhat or disagree strongly with it. First,
STRONGLY SOMEWHAT SOMEWHAT STRONGLY
AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE DNA
Family is more important than friends………………1 2 3 4 6 V20
Children over 18 years old should take
financial responsibility for themselves……………...1 2 3 4 6 V21
Friends are more dependable than family………….. 1 2 3 4 6 V22
A person should make it financially on their own…..1 2 3 4 6 V23
It is important to visit your parents
at least once a year…………………………………..1 2 3 4 6 V24
Children should be taught not to
depend on the government for support……………...1 2 3 4 6 V25
Without religion, society would fall apart…………..1 2 3 4 6 V26
An individual’s rights are more important
than his or her responsibilities………………………1 2 3 4 6 V27
An individual’s rights are more important
than society’s needs…………………………………1 2 3 4 6 V28
The moral education of children is the
responsibility of the schools, not the parents……….1 2 3 4 6 V29
There is a feeling of a common goal
shared by nearly everyone in Los Angeles…………1 2 3 4 6 V30
2

4. Using the same rating scale, I would now like to ask your opinion on a series of
statements about how people think of themselves. As before, I will read you a series of
statements, and after I read each one I would like you to tell me if you agree strongly,
agree somewhat, disagree somewhat or disagree strongly with it. First,
STRONGLY SOMEWHAT SOMEWHAT STRONGLY
AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE DNA
I am proud to be American………………………….1 2 3 4 6 V31
I am proud of my cultural heritage………………….1 2 3 4 6 V32
I don’t feel like I am part of any one ethnic group,
I just feel like me…………………………………… 1 2 3 4 6 V33
It is important for all Americans to preserve
their ethnic heritage………………………………… 1 2 3 4 6 V34
In the past, Latinos were not well
accepted in Los Angeles…………………………….1 2 3 4 6 V35
There was more agreement 30 years ago about
what it means to be an American……………………1 2 3 4 6 V36
You cannot be Latino and also be an American…….1 2 3 4 6 V37
An immigrant needs to let go of their culture
completely in order to be American…………………1 2 3 4 6 V38
Los Angeles is more accepting of its ethnic
groups than any other city in America………………1 2 3 4 6 V39
I live in a neighborhood where neighbors
do favors for one another……………………………1 2 3 4 6 V40
Latinos are accepted in Los Angeles today………… 1 2 3 4 6 V41
There is a tension between Latinos and
Whites in Los Angeles………………………………1 2 3 4 6 V42
Too much attention is being given to ethnicity……..1 2 3 4 6 V43
Too much diversity can split society apart………….1 2 3 4 6 V44
I am afraid that Los Angeles is losing
control because of all the minorities……………….. 1 2 3 4 6 V45
There is tension between Latinos and
Asians in Los Angeles………………………………1 2 3 4 6 V46
There is tension between Latinos and
Blacks in Los Angeles………………………………1 2 3 4 6 V47
3

Now I’d like to talk about some of your entertainment preferences.
5. What is your favorite television show? (ONE ANSWER ONLY)
____________________________________________________ V48
6. Who is your favorite musical group or singer? (ONE ANSWER ONLY)
____________________________________________________ V49
7. I am going to read you some statements about social relationships. As I read each
statement, tell me if you agree strongly, agree somewhat, disagree somewhat or disagree
strongly with it. First,
STRONGLY SOMEWHAT SOMEWHAT STRONGLY
AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE DNA
The mix of ethnic groups and cultures is one of
the things I like about Los Angeles………………… 1 2 3 4 6 V50
I don’t know much about my own cultural heritage.. 1 2 3 4 6 V51
I take the time to learn about other peoples’
cultures in Los Angeles…………………………….. 1 2 3 4 6 V52
My expectations for myself are lower than others…. 1 2 3 4 6 V53
People should marry only those of their
own ethnic group……………………………………1 2 3 4 6 V54
People should marry only those of
their own religious faith……………………………. 1 2 3 4 6 V55
Proposition 187 woke up the Latino
population politically………………………………..1 2 3 4 6 V56
I don’t vote because my one vote is not
going to change anything……………………………1 2 3 4 6 V57
Very soon Latinos will be running Los Angeles……1 2 3 4 6 V58
Latino immigrants should be allowed
into the US without restrictions……………………..1 2 3 4 6 V59
Most Latinos are suspected of being
illegal immigrants………………………………….. 1 2 3 4 6 V60
Latino immigrants bring the problems that exist
in Mexico and Central America to Los Angeles…… 1 2 3 4 6 V61
In order to succeed in L.A. it is important to
speak more that one language……………………….1 2 3 4 6 V62
I don’t try for any promotion at work because
I know I won’t get it……………………………….. 1 2 3 4 6 V63
There is a lot of opportunity for me in Los Angeles.. 1 2 3 4 6 V64
4

Next we have some questions about your involvement in community activities.
8. How many hours per week, if any, do you spend doing the following activities?
NONE

10. Using the same rating scale as before, we want to ask about educational concerns. As I
read you a series of statements after each one I would like you to tell me if you agree
strongly, agree somewhat, disagree somewhat or disagree strongly with it. First,
STRONGLY SOMEWHAT SOMEWHAT STRONGLY
AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE DNA
A high school diploma is not enough
in today’s job market………………………………..1 2 3 4 6 V78
Most Latino children are not succeeding in school…1 2 3 4 6 V79
It is largely the parent’s fault if Latino children
are not succeeding in school………………………...1 2 3 4 6 V80
It is largely the teacher’s fault if Latino children
are not succeeding in school………………………...1 2 3 4 6 V81
Many school teachers have negative attitudes
towards Latino children……………………………..1 2 3 4 6 V82
All children should learn to speak English at school..1 2 3 4 6 V83
I want my child to speak Spanish……………………1 2 3 4 6 V84
Latino teens who are immigrants are more likely
to drop out of school………………………………...1 2 3 4 6 V85
It is essential for children to learn how
to use computers…………………………………….1 2 3 4 6 V86
11. Generally speaking, how much education do you think it takes for a young person to be
successful these days? (CIRCLE ONE ANSWER ONLY)
HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA………………………. 01
COLLEGE DEGREE (N.S.)………………………..02
AA/TECH. CERT/TRADE CERT………………… 03
BA/BS ………………………………………………04
MA/MS…………………………………………….. 05
DOCTORATE (PHD/LLD/MD)…………………... 06
OTHER (SPECIFY___________________)……….07
V87
V87TXT
6

12. The following statements are about the media and about the public image of Latinos. As
I read each statement, tell me if you agree strongly, agree somewhat, disagree somewhat
or disagree strongly with it. First,
STRONGLY SOMEWHAT SOMEWHAT STRONGLY
AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE DNA
Spanish language television and radio interferes
with Latinos adapting to American life……………..1 2 3 4 6 V88
Spanish language television and radio helps
Latinos to participate in American society………….1 2 3 4 6 V89
The medias’ portrayal of Latinos is offensive………1 2 3 4 6 V90
Latinos are portrayed realistically on television…… 1 2 3 4 6 V91
Latinos have a desire to join the middle class ………1 2 3 4 6 V92
I am offended when a Latino starts
talking to me in Spanish……………………………. 1 2 3 4 6 V93
Most Latinos who were not taught to speak
Spanish feel they were cheated…………………….. 1 2 3 4 6 V94
It is important for women to be able to earn a living.1 2 3 4 6 V95
Latina teenage girls are more likely to become
pregnant and not finish their education……………..1 2 3 4 6 V96
Latino gang membership is a young rebellious
phase that they grow out of…………………………1 2 3 4 6 V97
13. What groups, clubs or organizations do you belong to, if any? (CIRLCE ALL
ANSWERED)
NEIGHBORHOOD (COMMUNITY WATCH/BLOCK)……… 1 V98
CLUBS CONNECTED TO HOME COUNTRY/TOWN………. 2 V99
CHURCH CLUBS/GROUPS.……………………………………3 V100
CHILD’S SCHOOL/PARENT ORGS. (PTA/SCOUTS/4H)…… 4 V101
SPORTS/ATHLECTIC CLUBS/ASSNS……………………….. 5 V102
FRATERNAL ORGS. (ELKS/MASONS/ETC.)……………….. 1 V103
HOBBY CLUBS………………………………………………… 2 V104
ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS (SIERRA/GREENPEACE)… 3 V105
BOOK/LECTURE/ART/MUSIC CLUBS……………………….4 V106
LABOR UNION………………………………………………… 5 V107
SOCIAL CLUBS…………………………………………………1 V108
OTHER (SPECIFY______________________________)……...2 V109
V110TXT
DO NOT BELONG TO ANY……………………………………0 V110
7

14. Are you currently registered to vote? (DO NOT READ RESPONSES)
YES………………………… 1
NO………………………….. 5
NOT ELIGIBLE…………….6
V111
15. Who is the president of the United States? (DO NOT READ RESPONSES)
CLINTON………………………………….. 1
OTHER (SPECIFY________________)…...0 V112 V112TXT
DON’T KNOW……………………………..8
16. Who is the president of Mexico? (DO NOT READ RESPONSES)
ZEDILLO…………………………………...1
OTHER (SPECIFY________________)…...0 V113 V113TXT
DON’T KNOW……………………………..8
17. As you may remember, California Proposition 187 that passed in November of 1994
placed restrictions on who was eligible for certain types of public assistance. What
influence did Proposition 187 passing vote have on you? (PROBES: BECOME
POLITICALLY ACTIVE, REGISTER TO VOTE, BECOME CITIZEN)
____________________________________________________________ V114
____________________________________________________________ V115
____________________________________________________________ V116
18. What does it mean to you to be American? V117
____________________________________________________________ V118
____________________________________________________________ V119
19. What does it mean to you be successful in Los Angeles? V120
____________________________________________________________ V121
____________________________________________________________ V122
8

20. In what religion were you raised? (DO NOT READ LIST. ONE ANSWER ONLY)
CATHOLICISM…………………………………….01
PROTESTANT…………………………………….. 02
PENTECOSTAL/EVANGELICAL……………….. 03
MORMON…………………………………………. 04
7 TH DAY ADVENTIST……………………………. 05
BAPTIST……………………………………………06
JEHOVAH’S WITNESS……………………………07
CHRISTIAN (N.S.)…………………………………08
OTHER CHRISTIAN (SPECIFY_________)…….. 09
JEWISH……………………………………………..10
MUSLIM/ISLAM………………………………….. 11
BUDDHISM/ZEN/CONFUCIAN…………………. 12
OTHER (SPECIFY_________________)………….13
NONE/ATHEIST/AGNOSTIC……………………. 14
V123
V123TXT
21. What is your current religious preference? (DO NOT READ LIST. ONE ANSWER
ONLY)
CATHOLICISM…………………………………….01
PROTESTANT…………………………………….. 02
PENTECOSTAL/EVANGELICAL……………….. 03
MORMON…………………………………………. 04
7 TH DAY ADVENTIST……………………………. 05
BAPTIST……………………………………………06
JEHOVAH’S WITNESS……………………………07
CHRISTIAN (N.S.)…………………………………08
OTHER CHRISTIAN (SPECIFY_________)…….. 09
JEWISH……………………………………………..10
MUSLIM/ISLAM………………………………….. 11
BUDDHISM/ZEN/CONFUCIAN…………………. 12
OTHER (SPECIFY_________________)………….13
NONE/ATHEIST/AGNOSTIC……………………. 14
V124
V124TXT
22. How often do you attend religious services? Would you say:
Twice a month or more,……………………………. 1
Once a month to once every six months,……………2
Once every six months to once a year, or………….. 3
Less than once a year or never?……………………. 4
V125
9

23. Have you ever sent money to family members in another country?
YES………………………………………… 1
NO………………………………………….. 5
V126
24. Do you, or does anyone in your household have access to a computer at home, at work, at
school, or some other way?
YES…………..CONTINUE……………….. 1
NO…………..SKIP TO Q27……………….5
V127
25. Do you have a computer in your home?
YES………………………………………… 1
NO………………………………………….. 5
V128
26. What do you, or other member of your family use the computer for? (DO NOT READ
LIST. CIRCLE ALL MENTIONS.)
BUSINESS/WORK…………………………1
SCHOOL WORK………………………….. 2
GAMES/RECREATION……………………3
INFORMATION/INTERNET/WEB………. 4
E-MAILING TO FAMILY MEMBERS……5
E-MAILING TO FRIENDS……………….. 1
WRITING LETTERS/STORIES/ETC…….. 2
APPOINTMENTS/CHECK BOOKS/ETC…3
SHOPPING………………………………… 4
V129
V130
V131
V132
V133
V134
V135
V136
V137
OTHER (SPECIFY_________________)….5 V138 V138TXT
10

These last questions are for descriptive purposes only and will be grouped with all the other
respondents data to describe the sample of people we have interviewed.
27. What is your marital status? Are you currently:
Single, never married,……………………….1
Married,…………………………………….. 2
Widowed,……………………………………3
Separated,…………………………………... 4
Divorced, or…………………………………5
Living with someone as married?………….. 6
V139
28. Do you have any children 18 years of age or younger?
YES…………..ASK A…………….. 1
NO………..SKIP TO Q31………….5
V140
29. How many children 18 years of age or younger do you have?
# 18 OR UNDER:______________ V141 (2)
30. How many of these children 18 or younger currently live with you?
# 18 OR UNDER LIVING W/R:______ V142 (2)
32. How many years of schooling did you complete and receive credit for
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 13 14 15 16 17+ V143 (2)
SKIP TO Q33
IF 12 OR MORE YEARS COMPLETED ASK:
33. What is the highest diploma or degree you have achieved? (DO NOT READ)
HIGH SCHOOL OR GED…………………. 1
AA OR TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION….2
BA/BS ………………………………………3
MA/MS…………………………………….. 4
PHD/MD/LLD/ETC………………………...5
NONE……………………………………….0
V144
34. We would like to know about your employment status. Are you currently:
Self employed, in your own business,………1
Employed full time,…………………………2
Employed part time,………………………...3
Unemployed, but looking for work, or……..4
Not employed and not looking for work?…..5
V145
IF RESPONDENT HAS NEVER BEEN MARRIED (Q27 CODE 1) SKIP TO Q37.
11

34. How many years of schooling did your partner complete and receive credit for?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 13 14 15 16 17+ V146 (2)
SKIP TO Q36
IF 12 OR MORE YEARS COMPLETED ASK:
35. What is the highest diploma or degree he/she has achieved? (DO NOT READ)
HIGH SCHOOL OR GED…………………. 1
AA OR TECHNICAL CERTIFICATION….2
BA/BS ………………………………………3
MA/MS…………………………………….. 4
PHD/MD/LLD/ETC………………………...5
NONE……………………………………….0
V147
36. What about your partner’s employment status. Is your partner currently:
Self employed, in your own business,………………1
Employed full time,…………………………………2
Employed part time,…………………………………3
Unemployed, but looking for work, or…………….. 4
Not employed and not looking for work?…………...5
V148
37. When you go to a medical clinic or doctor, is your bill paid: (ONE ANSWER ONLY)
Entirely by yourself,……………….SKIP TO Q38……………….. 1
Partially by you and part by insurance, or…………………………..2
Completely by insurance?………………………………………….. 3 V149
DON’T PAY & DON’T HAVE INSURANCE…SKIP TO Q38….. 4
NEVER GO TO DOCTOR………………………………………… 5
38. What type of health insurance or health care coverage do you have? Is it:(ONE
ANSWER ONLY)
Paid for by an employer or union,…………………..1
Paid for entirely by yourself, or……………………. 2
Is it provided by the government through programs
Such as MediCal, Medicare, or SSI?………………..3
OTHER (SPECIFY_______________________)….4
HAVE NO INSURANCE………………………….. 5
V150
12

39. Was your approximate total household income in 1998, from all workers and all sources
and before taxes? Was it:
Under $10,000……………………………… 01
$10,000 to $20,000………………………….02
$20,001 to $30,000………………………….03 V151
$30,001 to $40,000………………………….04
$40,001 to $50,000………………………….05
$50,001 to $60,000………………………….06
$60,001 to $70,000 or,………………………07
Over $70,000?……………………………… 08
40. In what year were you born? YEAR: _______ V152 (2)
41. In what country were you born?
UNITED STATES……SKIP TO END…… 000
OTHER COUNTRY (SPECIFY BELOW)
NAME OF COUNTRY:___________________ ASK A V153 (3)
A. At what age did you become a naturalized citizen of the U.S.?
AGE:______ V154 (3)
NOT A CITIZEN………..00
IF RESPONDENT IS NOT A NATURALIZED CITIZEN ASK B.
IF RESPONDENT IS A NATURALIZED CITIZEN SKIP TO END.
B. Do you plan to become a naturalized citizen? (DO NOT READ)
YES………………………………………… 1
NO………………………………………….. 2
NOT SURE………………………………… 3
CURRENTLY IN PROCESS……………… 4
NOT ELIGIBLE…………………………….5
V155
C. Are you a permanent resident?
YES………………………………………… 1
NO…………………………………………..5
NOT ELIGIBILE (VOLUNTEERED)……..6
V156
13

END: We want to thank you very much for your time and your participation in this study.
INTERVIEW OBSERVATION:
42. RESPONDENT WAS:
MALE……………….1
FEMALE……………2
V157
43. INTERVIEW WAS CONDUCTED IN:
SPANISH………….. 1
ENGLISH………….. 2
V158
44. RESPONDENT WAS:
VERY INTERESTED………………1
SOMEWHAT INTERESTED…….. 2
NOT VERY INTERESTED……….. 3
NOT AT ALL INTERESTED…….. 4
V159
45. COMMENTS YOU THINK ARE INTERESTING ABOUT THE INTERVIEW OR
RESPONDENT:
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
V160
V160
V160
______________________________________________________________
TIME END: _______ V163(4)
14

LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY SURVEY
#2133
CALL RECORD AND SCREENER
LABLE
LOG:_______
EDIT:______
SCREENER ID (6)
CODE:______
ENTRY:____
SCREENER 1 ID:______ SCR1(3)
INTERVIEWER 1 ID:_____ INT1(3)
SCREENER 2 ID:______ SCR2(3)
INTERVIEWER 2 ID:_____ INT2(3)
******************************************************************************
DAY DATE TIME OUTCOME COMMENTS
1. am/pm
2. am/pm
3. am/pm
4. am/pm
5. am/pm
6. am/pm
7. am/pm
8. am/pm
9. am/pm
10. am/pm
11. am/pm
12. am/pm
13. am/pm
14. am/pm
DATE1/DATE2
OUT1(2)/OUT2(2)
OUTCOME CODES:
NON-RESIDENTIAL # 01 1 REFUSAL TO SCREEN* 12 OTHER* 22
NON-WORKING# 02 2 REFUSAL TO SCREEN* 13 ELIGIBLE ASIAN** 23
DISC/OUT-OF-ORDER 03 1 REFUSAL TO INT* 14 ELIGIBLE BLACK*** 24
NO ANSWER 04 2 REFUSAL TO INT* 15 ELIGIBLE NHW 25
ANS. MACH. 05 TRANSFER TO SPANISH 16 ELIGIBLE HISP** 26
APPT. MADE 06 NO ADULT IN HH 17 COMPLETED ASIAN 90
CALLBACK NEEDED 07 CALL BLOCKING 18 COMPLETED BLACK 91
LANGUAGE BARRIER* 08 R AWAY FOR DURATION 19 COMPLETE NHW 92
INF.RESP. UNAVAILABLE 09 FAX/CAR/PAGER 20 *SPECIFY_______________
APPT. BROKEN 10 R INCAPABLE 21
BUSY SIGNAL 11 ________________________
**SEND TO UCLA
***SEND TO JUAREZ
151

Good (morning/afternoon/evening), I’m (NAME) calling from UCAL. We are conducting a
survey on behalf of the United Way about the residents of Los Angeles and how the different
communities in the L.A. area are doing. We are not seeking contributions. The information
obtained from this study will be used by the United Way and its’ agencies in developing
community programs for Los Angeles. The goal of this study is to strengthen community bonds
and make Los Angeles a better place to live. For the purpose of this study we are looking for
people who meet certain characteristics. To find eligible people we are dialing random telephone
numbers. All information that we collect will be kept completely confidential. No information
will be kept that identifies you or anyone in your household. In order to determine if there is a
member of your household who is qualified to participate in this important study, I need to ask a
few questions.
1. First, have I reached you on your home phone?
YES………..CONTINUE………………………….. ………1
NO……….TERMINATE IF NOT A RESIDENCE………. 2
2. What is the zip code of this address? ZIP CODE:__________ REALZIP(3)
3. Does anyone live her who is 18 years of age or older?
YES…………..CONTINUE……….. 1
NO….THANK & TERMINATE…...2
4. How many people 18 years of age or older live here as members of your household>
# 18 OR OLDER:_______________ NUM63
5. Are any of these people 18 years of age or older of Hispanic or Latino origin?
YES………………….1
NO………………….. 2
HISP65
6. Are any of these people 18 years of age or older Anglo or non-Hispanic white?
YES………………….1
NO………………….. 2
NHW65
7. Are any of these people 18 years of age or older of African American or Black origin?
YES………………….1
NO………………….. 2
AFR65
8. Are any of these people 18 years of age or older of Asian or Pacific Island origin?
YES………………….1
NO………………….. 2
AFR65
216

9. I need to find out just a little more about the people 18 or older who live here. May I
have (your/his/her/their) first name or initials? ENTER IN ROSTER BELOW.
NAME/INIT. SEX
M F
AGE B*DAY
MO./YR.
ETHN./RACE ELIG.?
YES NO
RESP.?
YES NO
1. 1 R1SEX R1AGE R1MO / R1YR R1RACE
2 1 R1ELIG 2 1 R1RSP 2
2. 1 R2SEX R2AGE R2MO / R2YR R2RACE
2 1 R2ELIG 2 1 R2RSP 2
3. 1 R3SEX R3AGE R3MO / R3YR R3RACE
2 1 R3ELIG 2 1 R3RSP 2
4. 1 R4SEX R4AGE R4MO / R4YR R4RACE
2 1 R4ELIG 2 1 R4RSP 2
10. (IF NECESSARY) Is (….) male or female? (CIRCLE CODE IN “SEX” IN ROSTER
11. What was (your/(…’s) age on (your/his/her) last birthday? (ENTER IN “AGE” IN
ROSTER)
12. In what month and year is (your/(….’s) birthday? (ENTER B’DAY MO. & YR. IN
ROSTER)
13. (Do you/Does (….)) identify as: (RECORD CODE “ETHN./RACE” IN ROSTER)
Latino or Hispanic,…………………………………………. 1
Anglo or non-Hispanic white,……………………………… 2
African American or Black,…………………………………3
Asian American or Pacific Islander, or…………………….. 4
Something else? (SPECIFY)_____________…ASK 13A… 5
13A. IF R MENTIONS A ‘MIXED’ ETHNICITY THAT INCLUDES LATINO/
HISPANIC, AND/OR NON-HISPANIC WHITE, AND/OR AFRICAN
AMERICAN/BLACK, AND/OR ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER, ASK:
With which one group (do you/does (….)) most closely identify? (RECORD CODE IN
“ETHN/RACE” IN ROSTER)
ONCE ROSTER HAS BEEN COMPLETED FOR ALL 18+, GO TO RESPONDENT
SELECTION.
RESPONDENT SELECTION:
ELIGIBILITY: MUST BE OF LATINO/HISPANIC OR NON-HISPANIC WHITE OR
AFRICAN AMERICAN/BLACK OR ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLAND ORIGIN. IF MORE
THAN ONE HOUSEHOLD MEMBER IS ELIGIBLE, SELECT RESPONDENT FROM
THE “ELIGIBLES” IN THE ROSTER WITH THE MOST RECENT (PAST)
BIRTHDAY MONTH. IF ONLY ONE HH MEMBER IS ELIGIBLE, BEGIN
INTERVIEW OR SCHEDULE APPOINTMENT.
17 3

United Way of Greater Los Angeles
PUBLICATION ORDER FORM
All orders must be prepaid: we are not able to accept purchase orders. Federal Express customers can have their orders sent
via FedEx; please indicate your FedEx account number in the order form below. For Larger orders please call to get shipping
cost listed below. For questions about ordering reports call (213) 630-2819. Fax with credit card information at (213) 630-2124
or mail order form with payment to:
Research Services
Attn: Juan Turcios
United Way of Greater Los Angeles
523 W. 6 th Street, Suite 345
Los Angeles, CA 90014
Title Ordered Quantity Cost Plus
Postage
Amount
Enclosed
(prepayment
required)
American Dream Makers: Latino Profiles Study (2000)
•= American Dream Makers: Executive Summary - 32 pages
•=
•=
Latino Profiles Full Report – 300 pages
CD-ROM
________
________
________
$ 5.00 ea.
$ 15.00 ea.
$ 15.00 ea.
$ 3.00
$ 4.00
$ 3.00
$________
$________
$________
State of the County Report: Los Angeles 1999
•= A Tale of Two Cities: Executive Summary - 2 pages - 40 facts
- 24 pages-100 facts
•= State of the County Report - Full Report - 325 pages
•= Zip Code Databook for SPAs - 580 pages - all 8 SPAs
•=
•=
•=
State of the County Report and Zip Code Databook - CD-ROM
Zip Code Databook for Single Service Planning Areas (SPA):
(SPA1, 2, 3 etc) $5.00/ea.
Los Angeles County Children’s Score Card
_______
_______
______
________
________
________
________
Free
$ 5.00 ea.
$ 15.00 ea.
$ 25.00 ea.
$ 15.00 ea.
$ 5.00 ea.
Free.
Free
$ 3.00
$ 4.00
$ 6.00
$ 3.00
$ 3.00
Free
$________
$________
$________
$________
$________
$________
$________
Asian Pacific Profiles Study (1996)
•=
•=
Asian Pacific Profiles - Executive Summary
Asian Pacific Factfinder -Full Report
- Diskettes
Donation to United Way *
________
________
________
Free
$ 25.00 ea.
$ 10.00 ea.
Free
$ 3.00
$ 3.00
*United Way’s research reports are service to the community; your donation to United Way will be appreciated.
Total
$________
$________
$________
$________
$________
Name:
Phone #:_________________________________
Organization:______________________________________________________________________________________
Address:__________________________________________________________________________________________
City: State:____Zip: FedEx # (if applicable)______________________
Credit Card: Visa__MasterCard__Amex__Discover__ (Only these credit cards accepted):__________________________
Name as it appears on card:
Expiration date on card:
Card #:___________________________________
Amount $________________________________