Posted by: Richie Bernardo

In an ideal world, all children would live worry-free and have access to their basic needs: nutritious food, a good education, quality health care and a secure home. Emotionally, they all would feel safe and be loved and supported by caring adults. When all such needs are met, children have a better chance of a stable and happy adult life. But in reality, not every child is so privileged — even in the richest and most powerful nation in the world.

The U.S., in fact, has the seventh highest rate of child poverty — over 29 percent — among economically developed countries. And according to the Children’s Defense Fund, more than 694,000 American children are abused or neglected every year. That’s one for every 45 seconds in a year.

But some states address the problems of underprivileged children better than others. To determine where children are most disadvantaged, WalletHub compared the 50 states and the District of Columbia across 24 key indicators of neediness. Our data set ranges from share of children in households with below-poverty income to child food-insecurity rate to share of maltreated children. Read on for our findings, expert insight on how to improve conditions for children and a full description of our methodology.

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

Main Findings

Embed on your website<iframe src="//d2e70e9yced57e.cloudfront.net/wallethub/embed/5403/geochart-privileged2017.html" width="556" height="347" frameBorder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> <div style="width:556px;font-size:12px;color:#888;">Source: <a href="https://ift.tt/2M9bGAE>  

States with the Most Underprivileged Children

Overall Rank*	State	Total Score	‘Socio-economic Welfare’ Rank	‘Health’ Rank	‘Education’ Rank
1	Mississippi	65.67	2	1	8
2	New Mexico	63.60	7	5	3
3	Nevada	63.51	6	15	1
4	Alaska	63.41	14	4	2
5	District of Columbia	62.60	1	21	17
6	Louisiana	60.80	9	6	5
7	West Virginia	59.08	3	3	31
8	Arkansas	57.96	4	2	26
9	Arizona	56.47	8	23	4
10	Oklahoma	56.07	13	7	13
11	Alabama	55.57	10	14	12
12	Oregon	54.27	12	31	6
13	Kentucky	52.56	5	12	40
14	Georgia	51.63	18	16	14
15	Tennessee	51.44	15	13	29
16	Florida	50.88	16	19	21
17	South Carolina	50.85	17	11	28
18	Indiana	50.07	19	10	30
19	Montana	49.56	20	8	32
20	Michigan	49.22	30	9	9
21	Ohio	48.25	26	18	15
22	California	46.49	11	46	27
23	North Carolina	45.09	21	30	22
24	Missouri	43.02	24	29	35
25	Hawaii	42.98	29	39	10
26	Washington	42.81	23	49	11
27	Maine	42.56	27	25	38
28	South Dakota	42.29	34	20	16
29	Texas	42.26	31	17	34
30	New York	40.79	25	36	37
31	Delaware	39.81	32	33	25
32	Rhode Island	39.80	28	37	36
33	Idaho	38.48	43	26	7
34	Illinois	36.65	35	32	39
35	North Dakota	35.35	47	28	20
36	Colorado	35.05	38	43	19
37	Pennsylvania	34.80	33	40	41
38	Vermont	34.49	22	51	46
39	Wyoming	34.45	42	27	24
40	Kansas	34.21	37	35	33
41	Minnesota	32.54	44	42	23
42	Virginia	31.21	41	38	42
43	Massachusetts	30.82	36	44	47
44	Utah	30.43	51	22	18
45	Nebraska	30.02	45	34	44
46	Iowa	29.91	46	24	48
47	Wisconsin	28.88	40	45	45
48	Maryland	28.32	48	41	43
49	Connecticut	25.99	39	47	50
50	New Hampshire	19.75	50	50	49
51	New Jersey	18.43	49	48	51

*No. 1 = Most Underprivileged

 

Ask the Experts

All children deserve a fulfilling childhood, but not every child will experience one. In order to identify key problem areas and learn how best to address them, we asked a panel of experts to share their thoughts on the following key questions:

1. Does being raised in poverty have lasting consequences for children in adulthood?
2. What are the most efficient and effective programs for equalizing opportunity for children?
3. Are elected officials placing a sufficiently high priority on the needs of underprivileged children? How might recent proposals to cut Medicaid influence health care access for children?
4. In evaluating the best and worst states for underprivileged children, what are the top five indicators?

< >

• Hal A. Lawson Professor of Educational Policy and Leadership, Professor of Social Welfare, School of Education, University at Albany
• Douglas S. Massey Henry G. Bryant Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs, Princeton University
• Arloc Sherman Senior Fellow, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
• Lawrence M. Berger MSW, Ph.D., Director of the Institute for Research on Poverty and Vilas Distinguished Achievement Professor and Ph.D. Program Chair at the School of Social Work at the University of Wisconsin-Madison
• Chris Wimer Co-Director, Center on Poverty and Social Policy, Columbia University
• Christopher Jencks Professor of Social Policy, Harvard, John F. Kennedy School of Government

More Experts

Methodology

In order to assess the living and economic conditions of children across the nation, WalletHub compared the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia across three key dimensions: 1) Socio-economic Welfare, 2) Health and 3) Education.

We evaluated those dimensions using 24 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 worst conditions for children. Except where noted otherwise, all references to “children” in the metrics below refer to the population aged 0 to 17.

Finally, we determined each state and the District’s weighted average across all metrics to calculate its overall score and used the resulting scores to rank-order our sample.

Socio-economic Welfare – Total Points: 50

• Share of Children in Foster Care: Double Weight (~8.70 Points)
• Share of Children in Single-Parent Families: Full Weight (~4.35 Points)
• Share of Children Living with Grandparents & No Parent in the Home: Full Weight (~4.35 Points)
• Children in Renter vs. Owner Households: Half Weight (~2.17 Points)Note: This metric measures the ratio of children living in renter-occupied housing units to children living in owner-occupied housing units.
• Unaccompanied Homeless Children & Youth Rate: Double Weight (~8.70 Points)
• Share of Children Living in Low-Income Households Where No Adults Work: Full Weight (~4.35 Points)
• Share of Children under 18 Whose Parents Lack Secure Employment: Full Weight (~4.35 Points)Note: The share of all children under age 18 living in families where no parent has regular, full-time employment.
• Share of Children Living in Households with Below-Poverty Income: Full Weight (~4.35 Points)
• Share of Children Living in Extreme Poverty: Full Weight (~4.35 Points)Note: This metric measures the percentage of children living in families earning incomes less than 250 percent of the federal poverty level.
• Economic Mobility: Full Weight (~4.35 Points)

Health – Total Points: 25

• Share of Maltreated Children: Double Weight (~4.55 Points)
• Percentage of Adolescents 9th to 12th Grade Who Felt Sad or Hopeless During The Past Year: Full Weight (~2.27 Points)Note: Students who live in poverty experience a greater degree of adverse experiences, which contributes to mental illness.
• Child Food-Insecurity Rate: Full Weight (~2.27 Points)
• Infant Mortality Rate (per 1,000 Births): Double Weight (~4.55 Points)
• Child Death Rate (per Capita): Double Weight (~4.55 Points)Note: Child includes the population aged 1 to 14.
• Share of Uninsured Children: Full Weight (~2.27 Points)
• Share of Poor Children Lacking All Seven Recommended Vaccines: Full Weight (~2.27 Points)Note: “Recommended vaccines” include the following: DTaP vaccine; polio vaccine; measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine; Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccine; varicella (chicken pox) vaccine; hepatitis B (HepB) vaccine; and pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV). “Poor children” include the population aged 19 to 35 months who live in households with incomes below poverty level.
• Share of Children with Unaffordable Medical Bills: Full Weight (~2.27 Points)Note: This metric measures the percentage of children aged 0 to 17 living in families who had problems or were unable to pay for the child’s medical bills.

Education – Total Points: 25

• Public High School Graduation Rate: Full Weight (~4.17 Points)
• Public High School Graduation Rate Among Economically Disadvantaged Students: Full Weight (~4.17 Points)
• Young Children Not Enrolled in School: Full Weight (~4.17 Points)Note: “Young Children” include the population aged 3 to 4.
• State Pre-K Funding per Preschool-Aged Resident: Full Weight (~4.17 Points)
• Quality of Public School System: Full Weight (~4.17 Points)Note: This metric is based on WalletHub’s “States with the Best & Worst School Systems” ranking.
• Share of Teens Neither Attending School Nor Working: Full Weight (~4.17 Points)Note: “Teens” include the population aged 16 to 19.

 

Sources: Data used to create this ranking were collected from of the U.S. Census Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, Child and Adolescent Health Measurement Initiative, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Educational Statistics, National Alliance to End Homelessness, Equality of Opportunity Project, The Annie E. Casey Foundation, Education Commission of the States, Feeding America and WalletHub research.

from Wallet HubWallet Hub


via Finance Xpress