Material security score
Poverty, child poverty, income inequality, and four basic-needs measures from CDC PLACES: food, housing, utilities and transport. It is flipped so higher means less hardship, which is why it is named for security, not for what it counts.
Reported for3,108areas, in 51 states — none in PR
Link to density0.11not mostly about how urban a place is
Nearby places alike0.59Moran’s I: strongly, neighbouring places tend to be similar
Typeratestandard deviations
How it has moved
Loading…
Every state, every year
One row per state and one column per year, sorted by the latest value. It shows states, not counties: nobody can scan 3,222 rows, and the pattern only shows when it all fits on one screen.
Loading…
Where it comes from
· derived from 9 measures (ACS, BRFSS, CDC, SAIPE)
Turned around so that higher is better. So it measures the absence of hardship, not hardship itself. The average of 9 measures from 4 publishers. Each measure is first put on a common scale: how many typical gaps between places (standard deviations) it sits above or below the average. Each is also flipped where needed, so higher is always better. Measures from the same publisher are averaged first, then the publishers are averaged together. Each level is scaled on its own. A county's score shows where it stands among counties, and a state's shows where it stands among states. The two are not on one scale, so do not compare them with each other. This is a summary, not a measurement.
Combining areas: it cannot be combined, so it is shown only where its publisher works it out.
What it goes with
The strongest links that have a page of their own. Unadjusted is the link before adjusting for anything, from −1 (opposite) to +1 (in step). Adjusted compares places with the same population density, income and education levels, so those differences can’t explain the link. This list leaves out the 12 pairs built from the same numbers or the same model as this measure, since they are bound to match.
| Measure | Unadjusted | Adjusted |
|---|---|---|
| Material security score and Self-care disabilityWhere Material security score is higher, Self-care disability tends to be lower: a strong link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Self-care disability by US county | -0.92 | -0.88 |
| Material security score and StrokeWhere Material security score is higher, Stroke tends to be lower: a strong link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Stroke by US county | -0.91 | -0.86 |
| Material security score and Vision disabilityWhere Material security score is higher, Vision disability tends to be lower: a strong link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Vision disability by US county | -0.89 | -0.83 |
| Material security score and Received food stampsWhere Material security score is higher, Received food stamps tends to be lower: a strong link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Received food stamps by US county | -0.89 | -0.82 |
| Material security score and Fair or poor self-rated healthWhere Material security score is higher, Fair or poor self-rated health tends to be lower: a strong link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Fair or poor self-rated health by US county | -0.86 | -0.80 |
| Material security score and Independent-living disabilityWhere Material security score is higher, Independent-living disability tends to be lower: a strong link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Independent-living disability by US county | -0.88 | -0.80 |
| Material security score and Mobility disabilityWhere Material security score is higher, Mobility disability tends to be lower: a strong link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Mobility disability by US county | -0.88 | -0.80 |
| Material security score and Diagnosed diabetesWhere Material security score is higher, Diagnosed diabetes tends to be lower: a strong link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Diagnosed diabetes by US county | -0.86 | -0.79 |
| Material security score and Disability-free scoreWhere Material security score is higher, Disability-free score tends to be higher: a strong link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Disability-free score by US county | +0.86 | +0.77 |
| Material security score and Returns claiming the earned income creditWhere Material security score is higher, Returns claiming the earned income credit tends to be lower: a strong link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Returns claiming the earned income credit by US county | -0.87 | -0.77 |
Population makeup
How this measure varies with the racial and ethnic makeup of counties. Every group is shown, whatever its rank. These are links across counties: they describe places, not people. They say nothing about any person’s risk or behaviour based on their race. Counties with a larger share of one group also differ in much else, such as income, segregation, region and history. The adjusted figure only accounts for density, income and education.
| Share of residents | Unadjusted | Adjusted |
|---|---|---|
| Material security score and Share White, not HispanicWhere Material security score is higher, Share White, not Hispanic tends to be higher: a moderate link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Share White, not Hispanic by US county | +0.52 | +0.68 |
| Material security score and Share Black, not HispanicWhere Material security score is higher, Share Black, not Hispanic tends to be lower: a moderate link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Share Black, not Hispanic by US county | -0.64 | -0.60 |
| Material security score and Share Hispanic or Latino, any raceWhere Material security score is higher, Share Hispanic or Latino, any race tends to be lower: a weak link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared. Share Hispanic or Latino, any race by US county | -0.14 | -0.29 |
| Material security score and Share Asian, not HispanicWhere Material security score is higher, Share Asian, not Hispanic tends to be lower: a weak link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared. Share Asian, not Hispanic by US county | +0.16 | -0.29 |
| Material security score and Share American Indian or Alaska Native, not HispanicWhere Material security score is higher, Share American Indian or Alaska Native, not Hispanic tends to be lower: a moderate link that holds when only places with similar density, income and education are compared, and inside states as well. Share American Indian or Alaska Native, not Hispanic by US county | -0.35 | -0.45 |
Highest and lowest
Of 3,108 counties reporting it. These are the two ends of a national ranking. For most measures, that ranking mostly sorts places by income and how urban they are. That is why the place pages compare each place with similar places instead.
Highest
- Morgan County, UT — 1.83
- Los Alamos County, NM — 1.82
- Kalawao County, HI — 1.71
- Douglas County, CO — 1.69
- Loudoun County, VA — 1.64
Lowest
- East Carroll Parish, LA — -3.95
- Holmes County, MS — -3.64
- Ziebach County, SD — -3.46
- Martin County, KY — -3.33
- Sioux County, ND — -3.24
The middle area reports 0.252. The middle half of counties falls between -0.312 and 0.671 (the 25th to 75th percentile).
All measures · Explore its pairs · How the US county data works