Posted by: Unknown

Moving across state lines to start a family can be challenging. But if you’ve chosen Massachusetts for putting down roots, you’ve won the hardest part of the battle. This historically rich, academically prestigious and generally progressive New England state counts among the most family-friendly in America.

In WalletHub’s analysis of the Best & Worst States to Raise a Family, Massachusetts ranked No. 6 overall and earned particularly high marks in four out of five categories, including “family fun,” “health and safety,” “education and child care,” and “affordability.” But even in “socio-economics,” the final category, it outranked 28 states. Education and technology are unsurprisingly Massachusetts’ biggest industries, considering the state is the No. 1 most educated and third most innovative. Parents with high family standards therefore have little to sacrifice — and much to gain — by relocating to the Bay State.

As in any other state, however, certain cities excel more than others and offer better perks to parents with young children. That being the case, WalletHub’s data team compared 86 cities in Massachusetts based on 21 key indicators of family-friendliness. Our data set ranges from median family income to school-system quality to housing affordability. Read on for our findings, methodology and expert insight on certain family matters from a panel of researchers.

1. Main Findings
2. Ask the Experts
3. Methodology

Main Findings

Embed on your website<iframe src="//d2e70e9yced57e.cloudfront.net/wallethub/embed/36429/geochart-ma-families.html" width="556" height="347" frameBorder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> <div style="width:556px;font-size:12px;color:#888;">Source: <a href="http://ift.tt/2sA3q0c;  

Best Places to Live in Massachusetts for Families

Overall Rank (1 = Best)	City	Total Score	‘Family Life & Fun’ Rank	‘Education, Health & Safety’ Rank	‘Affordability’ Rank	‘Socio-economics’ Rank
1	Longmeadow, MA	79.40	2	4	1	14
2	Franklin Town, MA	77.23	32	2	2	5
3	Winchester, MA	76.77	5	1	7	1
4	Lexington, MA	74.36	21	8	4	7
5	Wellesley, MA	74.15	10	3	8	11
6	Needham, MA	73.73	14	11	5	4
7	Belmont, MA	71.52	4	5	36	8
8	Reading, MA	71.34	39	9	10	2
9	Milton, MA	71.18	13	10	6	34
10	Newton, MA	70.14	12	17	14	12
11	Arlington, MA	67.76	30	14	16	9
12	Melrose, MA	67.76	56	16	15	3
13	Marblehead, MA	66.50	31	6	39	19
14	Wilmington, MA	66.19	57	26	13	10
15	Lynnfield, MA	66.03	80	7	40	6
16	Maynard, MA	65.30	70	24	3	44
17	Norwood, MA	65.13	51	20	18	24
18	Newburyport, MA	64.96	50	27	11	25
19	Swampscott, MA	63.65	65	18	20	28
20	Woburn, MA	63.64	40	34	38	15
21	Braintree Town, MA	63.39	58	36	22	18
22	Easthampton Town, MA	62.92	73	12	30	30
23	Wakefield, MA	62.74	68	21	35	20
24	Burlington, MA	62.74	48	38	32	13
25	Brookline, MA	62.42	8	25	54	39
26	Watertown Town, MA	62.25	62	28	46	16
27	Stoneham, MA	62.02	72	15	29	26
28	Hudson, MA	61.82	55	32	26	31
29	Somerset, MA	61.52	75	22	24	36
30	Dedham, MA	61.19	64	46	17	27
31	Amherst Center, MA	60.90	19	13	23	62
32	Abington, MA	60.70	79	42	28	17
33	Greenfield Town, MA	60.49	16	57	19	56
34	Weymouth Town, MA	60.07	77	33	31	37
35	Marlborough, MA	59.89	29	44	41	35
36	Westfield, MA	59.44	61	30	33	41
37	Northampton, MA	59.43	20	55	9	61
38	Beverly, MA	59.21	54	29	53	42
39	Agawam Town, MA	59.00	60	41	21	53
40	Medford, MA	58.72	47	37	60	22
41	Methuen Town, MA	57.79	36	40	45	54
42	Waltham, MA	57.47	74	31	63	21
43	Amesbury Town, MA	57.44	53	59	34	47
44	Gloucester, MA	57.42	33	19	69	49
45	Danvers, MA	57.40	45	54	52	29
46	Pittsfield, MA	57.40	1	52	37	69
47	Milford, MA	57.05	49	39	27	58
48	Attleboro, MA	57.05	66	45	25	50
49	Cambridge, MA	56.34	6	51	68	48
50	Hull, MA	54.72	86	23	49	45
51	Peabody, MA	54.07	81	35	67	38
52	Taunton, MA	53.93	63	47	44	64
53	Framingham, MA	53.01	37	83	48	40
54	Saugus, MA	52.95	67	63	57	32
55	Quincy, MA	52.57	76	50	66	43
56	Leominster, MA	52.45	41	72	12	65
57	Salem, MA	52.36	7	60	73	63
58	Barnstable Town, MA	51.84	46	70	65	52
59	West Springfield Town, MA	51.83	27	78	51	59
60	Palmer Town, MA	51.35	82	43	58	66
61	Chicopee, MA	51.30	35	53	59	68
62	Somerville, MA	50.80	59	49	77	33
63	Haverhill, MA	49.98	28	66	61	67
64	Gardner, MA	49.86	38	64	42	74
65	South Yarmouth, MA	49.84	83	75	72	23
66	Southbridge Town, MA	49.06	44	56	56	76
67	Fitchburg, MA	48.52	43	68	43	71
68	Holbrook, MA	48.15	85	73	47	51
69	Winthrop Town, MA	47.98	78	48	81	46
70	Malden, MA	47.91	69	58	75	55
71	Lowell, MA	47.31	18	67	70	70
72	North Adams, MA	46.78	42	74	50	79
73	Webster, MA	46.43	23	61	64	83
74	Worcester, MA	46.38	15	76	62	77
75	Everett, MA	44.73	34	65	82	57
76	Randolph, MA	43.91	84	62	55	73
77	Brockton, MA	40.76	25	80	71	81
78	Lynn, MA	40.05	52	71	76	78
79	New Bedford, MA	39.75	26	81	74	82
80	Revere, MA	38.04	71	69	84	60
81	Fall River, MA	37.81	24	82	79	80
82	Springfield, MA	34.59	3	85	78	86
83	Holyoke, MA	34.54	9	86	80	84
84	Boston, MA	34.48	22	79	86	75
85	Chelsea, MA	33.92	11	84	85	72
86	Lawrence, MA	31.36	17	77	83	85

Ask the Experts

Families share a number of common priorities when choosing a new place to call home. With that in mind, we asked a panel of experts in fields such as family studies and public health to share their insight regarding the process of evaluating prospective Massachusetts cities on a family’s shortlist. Click on the experts’ profiles below to read their bios and their thoughts on the following key questions:

1. What are some tips for young families looking for quality public schools and affordable housing in Massachusetts?
2. How can local officials in Massachusetts make their cities more attractive to young families?
3. Looking just within Massachusetts, to what degree is child development and a family’s quality of life influenced by the city they live in?

< >

• Wayne Feiden Director of Planning and Sustainability for the City of Northampton and Lecturer of Practice in Regional Planning at University of Massachusetts
• Kirby Deater-Deckard Professor of Psychological and Brain Sciences at University of Massachusetts Amherst
• Doreen Arcus Associate Professor of Psychology at University of Massachusetts Lowell
• Danna Greenberg Walter H. Carpenter Professor of Organizational Behavior at Babson College
• Becky Wai-Ling Packard Director of the Weissman Center for Leadership and Professor of Psychology and Education at the Mount Holyoke College

Wayne Feiden Director of Planning and Sustainability for the City of Northampton and Lecturer of Practice in Regional Planning at University of Massachusetts Looking just within Massachusetts, to what degree is child development and a family’s quality of life influenced by the city they live in? Young families are looking for communities that support all of their needs. Quality local schools are a part of this, but so are recreation opportunities, walkable neighborhoods, vibrant village or urban centers, and a caring community. Suburbs still attract families that want space and good schools, but Millennials and young families are increasingly interested in a sense of place, in communities that have a "there there," which often means traditional village and community centers. Kirby Deater-Deckard Professor of Psychological and Brain Sciences at University of Massachusetts Amherst What are some tips for young families looking for quality public schools and affordable housing in Massachusetts? There is a great deal of information available online that provides some standardized information and not just strangers’ opinions about housing and schools. Most of the online housing and schools search websites link to a variety of other sites and databases that can tell you information about everything from average utility costs to strengths and weaknesses of the neighborhood school. Once you have narrowed down your search, look online for visitor information centers and chambers of commerce, which have lots of additional information as well. How can local officials in Massachusetts make their cities more attractive to young families? Young families need safe, comfortable affordable housing and accessible, quality childcare and schools. They need access to affordable, healthy food options and green space. Local officials know this; most who run for office or take on management positions do this precisely for these reasons. They are working toward these goals, usually in collaboration with regional, statewide and national representatives and the area businesses and education institutions. Looking just within Massachusetts, to what degree is child development and a family’s quality of life influenced by the city they live in? The answer to this question is not specific to Massachusetts. In general, the physical, social-cultural, and economic environment of the city, town, or rural area you live in has a major impact on family and child health and development. Crowding and inadequate housing, pollution, lack of infrastructure such as public transportation, and divestment from local schools are just some examples of environmental risks that increase stress and impair physical and psychological health. Doreen Arcus Associate Professor of Psychology at University of Massachusetts Lowell What are some tips for young families looking for quality public schools and affordable housing in Massachusetts? The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education offers a wealth of school district data on its website. In general, wealthier communities have public schools that are provided with greater resources and that produce better test results. Beyond test scores, parents should look for a significant percentage of students who go on to two- or four-year colleges, high retention rates for educators as a measure of teacher experience, and high attendance, low dropout, and low suspension rates as measures of positive school climate. Working parents may also want to consider after-school child care programs either onsite or in collaboration with local recreation agencies. It is important to remember that school performance data are averages. In a state with an especially high cost of living, this should be comforting to families whose limited financial resources require trade-offs between affordable housing and average measures of school quality as well as to parents who value the role of income, racial and cultural diversity in their children’s education. Children can thrive even in low performing schools, especially with parental involvement and collaboration among administrators, teachers and parents. Research has demonstrated strong links between collaboration and student learning outcomes. Many districts administer surveys of parent satisfaction that can be found on their websites. Parent-teacher organizations can also be useful sources of information. Parents of all young children should consider the experience of students with disabilities in the school district. Learning disabilities, for example, may not be evident until a child reaches a point in which the challenges of the curriculum outweigh his or her capacity to cope, and therefore not be evident in the preschool or even early elementary years. The percentage of students with disabilities across the state hovers around 17 percent from year to year, yet some communities have rates in the single digits. Parents may want to ask some hard questions about those data and whether they are an indication of a strong prevention program or of a district that erects barriers to disability diagnosis and costly programming. Every school district is required to have a parent organization for families of children with disabilities; the Parent Advisory Council can provide an important perspective on the district’s success at providing special education and related services. In addition, every state is required by federal law to have a Parent Information Center that provides information and support without cost; in Massachusetts, it is the Federation for Children with Special Needs. Finally, young families do not stay young forever. Middle and high schools that offer a variety of educational options in a community that provides recreation and job opportunities will offer their adolescents important bridges to their adult lives. How can local officials in Massachusetts make their cities more attractive to young families? Schools are important vehicles for promoting positive outcomes in children. Full funding for schools and an aggressive investment in early education provide a strong return on investment. In addition, communities that offer opportunities for families to connect in parks, events, libraries and through local businesses and institutions (e.g., churches, Boys and Girls clubs) create important social capital. Research has shown that positive health outcomes -- thriving physically and academically, not engaging in high-risk behaviors, and demonstrating resiliency or the capacity to cope with adversity -- are associated with community characteristics. These include adult role models, caring and safe neighborhoods, roles and opportunities for youth in the community, and the availability of youth programs. When local officials make long-term commitments to build social fabric through education, nutrition, exercise, social interaction, and opportunities to serve others, they are building healthy and sustainable communities. Looking just within Massachusetts, to what degree is child development and a family’s quality of life influenced by the city they live in? This is a complex issue and one that is difficult to answer with hard empirical evidence. Obviously, there is enormous variation within cities and towns in the outcomes for children and youth. Developmental hazards, such as environmental toxins and neighborhood violence, provide significant risks, but it is difficult to establish strong cause-effect relations with respect to other aspects of community life. Levels of community resources may be especially important for families in the presence of other risk factors, such as poverty, disability, or mental illness. The types of programs and services that are associated with health communities probably enhance child development and family quality of life. In the end, though, address is not destiny. It cannot guarantee outcome; it can only influence the probabilities. Danna Greenberg Walter H. Carpenter Professor of Organizational Behavior at Babson College What are some tips for young families looking for quality public schools and affordable housing in Massachusetts? When young families are looking to buy their first house, they weigh out the obvious cost-benefit factors -- quality schools and affordability. Yet, for families with two working parents there are other cost-benefits that affect family and work life that need to be considered. According to 2016 data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 60% of families with children under the age of 18 have both parents employed. For these families, there are other emotional and financial costs, and benefits to consider. Commuting is the first issue that comes to mind. Families want to weigh out what is the commuting distance to each person’s workplace, how will each partner commute to work, and how predictable is each partner’s commute time? Couples then need to consider how commuting will impact how the couple manages daycare and/or school-age childcare, daily household responsibilities, and overall family life. If commutes are long and unpredictable, this may increase child-care costs as well as stress for a family which may negate the benefits of moving farther away to achieve a higher balance of quality school and affordable housing. Young families also want to expand their time horizon to think about the extent to which a city will support their family life in the future. Once in school, children have approximately 14 weeks “vacation” along with a 9:00-3:00 pm school day. Parents want to think ahead and research what options are available for school-age childcare, how frequently are they used, and what is the quality. Finally, families may also want to research what support exists in the city for working mothers in terms of overall percentage of working women in the city and networks for working mother through city-based young mother groups or newcomer groups. Connecting with other working mothers in one’s community supports a young working mothers’ confidence about combining work and family which enhances her well-being at work and at home. How can local officials in Massachusetts make their cities more attractive to young families? The two primary ways cities can become more attractive to young families is by increasing access to high quality childcare and by supporting paid parental leave. Paid parental leave is an ongoing issue in the United States, as this country has the second to worst parental leave policy of any nation in the world. Cities such as Washington DC and New York have taken this issue on by creating their own parental leave laws. In Boston, Mayor Walsh has an initiative focused on improving the gender paid gap and one issue in doing so is improving parental leave. By taking up the issue of paid parental leave, cities are modeling and encouraging companies in their area to provide better parental leave policies for working couples. Beyond encouraging better parental leave, a city can directly support young families by helping to provide access to affordable, high quality child-care and school-age childcare. This is no easy task and it requires cities to think creatively and expansively about how to increase quality childcare options. Beyond providing city-sponsored childcare, a city may increase childcare by partnering with other organizations such as they YWCA. In providing childcare, cities also want to consider how to support child-care for children at different ages. Vacation camps and summer camps or summer work opportunities are important to families as children age. Cities may also want to get creative with inter-generational programming. Cities that are focused on improving support for seniors may explore how to engage senior volunteers to provide higher quality afterschool programming. Finally, cities can also think about how to create an eco-system that encourages corporations, entrepreneurs, and non-profits to increase quality child-care opportunities in that city. There are no shortage of strategies to increase access to and quality of childcare if a city is not willing to be creative and entrepreneurial. Looking just within Massachusetts, to what degree is child development and a family’s quality of life influenced by the city they live in? A city affects a child and family in both direct and indirect ways. While child development and educational experts are better positioned to discuss the direct influences, as a work-family scholar I am more adept at discussing the indirect influences. A city that supports a working family through access to high quality childcare and afterschool care, through high quality public transportation, through public advocacy for better parental leave policies, eases the stresses and burdens of daily life for a dual-working family. With these stresses eased, parents have more time and psychological energy to be engaged parents -- which is paramount to a child’s development and to a family’s well-being. Becky Wai-Ling Packard Director of the Weissman Center for Leadership and Professor of Psychology and Education at the Mount Holyoke College What are some tips for young families looking for quality public schools and affordable housing in Massachusetts? All schools in Massachusetts have certain indicators including test scores, demographic characteristics of students and teachers, as well as the array of offerings in school (art, music instruction, and so on). While each family may differ in their definition of quality, many families will agree that they seek a school where children are valued and will learn. Meeting with the school principal and visiting the classroom(s) on different days will give you some ideas about what the learning environment is like. Beyond this, it is helpful to ask about the broader school culture -- what are the values and how are them upheld in the daily actions of the teachers/staff and students? In our school, we have a school culture that the students have played a large part in shaping, defining, and explaining in their own words/images. The broader school community values are reinforced through assemblies involving the entire school, and the wide array of ways that students are recognized for their daily actions (e.g., being kind to a new child, helping a teacher or the bus driver). Other parents may be more interested in learning about the array of advanced placement classes, co-enrollment options with community colleges, and language instruction options; asking specific questions and asking to review the middle or high school family handbook will give you some additional insights. Learning more about how schools manage access to field trips for all students, for example, can provide useful insights into the values of the community to include families from across socioeconomic backgrounds. Asking for connections with current families (through the Parent Guardian Organization), the principal, or the local family center can provide information about subsidized housing, bus routes, and/or walking routes. How can local officials in Massachusetts make their cities more attractive to young families? Local officials need to continue to work on improving business opportunities and relationships among businesses, higher education, government, and residents. Seeing ourselves in connection to one another in the system can help young families feel less fragmented as they consider the need to commute for a job, access to reliable and affordable childcare, as well as services for their children at school. The stronger the infrastructure for local businesses in particular, the better for the communities on the whole. I also think that having connections between local officials and the school, as well as visibility in public spaces such as the library, can help to demystify processes and create greater trust. The sense that the towns and cities value education does tend to make the city more attractive to a young family. Looking just within Massachusetts, to what degree is child development and a family’s quality of life influenced by the city they live in? The immediate and extended family has a major influence on child development, of course, and so does the city they live in. Having access to public transportation, bike lanes and sidewalks, and a wide array of low-cost or free activities (to include and beyond the public library) are just a few reasons a city can make a difference. Being able to play in a multiple parks with regularly maintained equipment and grounds, for example, can increase the likelihood that families from a variety of backgrounds will interact with one another.

Methodology

To help families find the best Massachusetts cities in which to put down roots, WalletHub’s analysts compared 86 cities in the state across four key dimensions: 1) Family Life & Fun, 2) Education, Health & Safety, 3) Affordability and 4) Socio-economics. Our sample considers only the city proper in each case and excludes cities in the surrounding metro area.

We evaluated the four dimensions using 21 relevant metrics, which are listed below with their corresponding weights. Each metric was graded on a 100-point scale, with a score of 100 representing the most suitable conditions for family life.

We then calculated the total score for each city based on its weighted average across all metrics and used the resulting scores to construct our final ranking.

Family Life & Fun – Total Points: 25

• Playgrounds per Capita: Full Weight (~4.17 Points)
• Number of Attractions: Full Weight (~4.17 Points)Note: “Attractions” includes, for instance, museums, theaters and zoos.
• Share of Families with Children Aged 0 to 17: Double Weight (~8.33 Points)
• Weather: Full Weight (~4.17 Points)Note: Based on WalletHub’s Cities with the Best & Worst Weather ranking.
• Average Commute Time: Full Weight (~4.17 Points)

Education, Health & Safety – Total Points: 25

• Quality of School System: Full Weight (~2.94 Points)
• High School Graduation Rate: Half Weight (~1.47 Points)
• Air Quality: Full Weight (~2.94 Points)
• Pediatricians per Capita: Full Weight (~2.94 Points)
• Share of Uninsured Children: Full Weight (~2.94 Points)Note: “Children” include the population aged 0 to 17.
• Violent-Crime Rate per Capita: Double Weight (~5.88 Points)
• Property-Crime Rate per Capita: Double Weight (~5.88 Points)

Affordability – Total Points: 25

• Housing Affordability: Full Weight (~12.50 Points)Note: This metric was calculated as follows: Housing Costs (accounts for both rental and sale prices) / Median Annual Family Income.
• General Affordability: Full Weight (~12.50 Points)Note: This metric was calculated as follows: Median Annual Family Income / Cost-of-Living Index.

Socioeconomics – Total Points: 25

• Separation & Divorce Rate: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)
• Share of Two-Parent Families: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)
• Share of Families Living Below Poverty Level: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)
• Share of Households Receiving Food Stamps: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)
• Unemployment Rate: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)
• Wealth Gap: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)
• Foreclosure Rate: Full Weight (~3.57 Points)

 

Sources: Data used to create this ranking were collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Environmental Protection Agency, County Health Rankings, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Renwood RealtyTrac, SchoolDigger.com, Yelp, TripAdvisor, Areavibes and WalletHub research.

from Wallet HubWallet Hub


via Finance Xpress