Connecticut Ranked #2 Among States for Fitness Centers/Gyms

The United States has more fitness centers than any other country in the world, and Connecticut is one of the reasons why.  The state is ranked #2 in the nation, just behind Minnesota, among states with the most gyms/fitness centers, according to data compiled by the website exercise.com.  Rounding out the top 10 are Wisconsin, Iowa, New Hampshire, Louisiana, Rhode Island, Colorado, Nebraska and South Dakota. The states were ranked based on the most gyms using these four categories: total number of gyms, state population in 2016, people per gym, and gyms per capita (100,000 people).  Totals were based on the 14 largest gym chains in America. There were more than 36,000 health clubs in the U.S. last year, up from 29,000 a decade ago.

As of 2017, the average yearly number of U.S. gym members is around 58 million, the website points out, with an average gym membership fee of $58 a month. Interestingly, two-thirds of gym members say they don’t actually go to their gym.

According to a Gallup survey of 335,050 adults, only 51.6 percent of Americans report exercising three or more days a week for at least 30 minutes.  Connecticut has nearly 300 gyms/fitness centers.

According to the International Health, Racquet and Sportsclub Association (IHRSA), total health club/gym/studio visits surpassed 5 billion a year ago.

UConn Study: When State Pays for ACT Exam, More Poor Youth Reach College

New research finds a simple strategy can modestly boost the share of students with limited financial resources who go on to college: requiring, and paying for, all students to take the ACT or SAT.  A University of Connecticut researcher examined the effects of requiring and paying for all public high school students to take a college entrance exam – which 11 states have done since 2001- and found that while the impact isn’t enormous, the policy is relatively inexpensive, and does move the needle on college enrollment. At just $34 per student, increases in four-year college attendance reach about 1 percentage point for low-income students, the higher education website Chalkbeat reports.  Ohio was the latest state to require all members of the junior class to take the exam, as of this past spring.

“Although these increases in the four-year college enrollment rate might not appear to be dramatically large, relative to other educational interventions this policy is inexpensive and currently being implemented on a large scale,” writes Joshua Hyman, an assistant professor at the University of Connecticut.

Hyman cautions, however, that paying for every student, regardless of income, to take the exam only goes so far.

“The results suggest that requiring all students to take a college entrance exam increases the supply of poor students scoring at a college-ready level by nearly 50 percent. Yet the policy increases the number of poor students enrolling at a four-year institution by only 6 percent. In spite of the policy, there remains a large supply of disadvantaged students who are high achieving and not on the path to enrolling at a four-year college.”

The research and 30-page journal entry “validates recent efforts … to expand access to these tests,” Chalkbeat points out, “which are required to enroll at most colleges and universities.”   In order of adoption, according to the paper, the states are Colorado, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Kentucky, Tennessee, Delaware, North Carolina, Louisiana, Wyoming, and Alabama.

In Connecticut, April 5, 2017, was the Connecticut SAT School Day administration.  SAT scores are used by the Connecticut State Department of Education (CSDE) for school and district accountability purposes, state Education Commissioner Diana Wentzell explained in a letter to parents earlier this year.

The research, published this summer in the peer-reviewed journal Education Finance and Policy, examined Michigan’s policy to require — and, importantly, pay for — high school juniors to take the ACT. Unsurprisingly, the number of students taking the exam jumped from 56 percent statewide to 91 percent after the policy was implemented in 2007. College attendance in the state then increased by nearly 2 percentage points (though the study can’t show how much of the increase was because of the mandatory ACT).

“The mandatory college entrance exam policy is more cost-effective than traditional [college financial] aid at boosting postsecondary attainment,” the study states.

Hyman found that, prior to the policy, a substantial number of Michigan’s low-income students didn’t take the ACT even though they would have scored at or above the standard for college readiness. That might been due to financial or logistical barriers, like the cost of the test (between $30 and $50) or difficulties traveling to an exam center on a Saturday. (Both the SAT and ACT offer fee waivers to low-income students, but the study notes that the waivers are underused.)

“I show that for every ten poor students taking a college entrance exam and scoring college-ready, there are an additional five poor students who do not take the test but who would score college-ready if they did,” Hyman explains.  “In spite of the policy, there remains a large supply of disadvantaged students who are high-achieving and not on the path to enrolling at a four-year college.”

Hyman, an Assistant Professor in the Department of Public Policy at the University of Connecticut, has a joint appointment in the Department of Economics and Neag School of Education. His research focuses broadly on labor economics, public finance, and the economics of education. As for the interest in Michigan, Hyman earned a Ph.D. in Economics and Public Policy from the University of Michigan in 2013.

7,000 Refugees Settle in CT Since 2001; Burma, Congo, Iran, Somalia Most Frequent Origin

The United States has long been the global leader in resettling refugees, defined as people forced to flee their home country to escape war, persecution or violence, explains Smithsonian magazine in a state-by-state comparison. Since 2001, the magazine reports, more than 895,000 refugees have settled in the U.S., typically after being referred by the United Nations and vetted by the State Department in a process that takes at least 18 months. By comparison, a million or so legal immigrants arrive annually. From October 2001 through 2016, Burma, Iraq, Somalia, Bhutan, and Iran are the top five nations that send refugees to the U.S.

Refugees to the United States have come mostly from the Middle East, Asia and Africa. While many immigrants, legal and undocumented, come from Latin America, U.S. regulations make it difficult for Central and South Americans to qualify as refugees, according to Smithsonian.

The magazine developed a series of charts that compare refugee populations resettled in 41 states since October 2001. In depicting the refugees’ nation or origin, the breakdown in each state is limited to nationalities with at least 500 people, and no more than the top 5 nationalities are shown.

The number of refugees from those five nations, as well the total number of refugees is indicated.

For Connecticut, the total number of refugees is 7,144. The largest percentage of refugees come from Burma, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iran and Somalia.  Those four nations were the home country for 3,824 of the refugees who settled in Connecticut since 2001.

Massachusetts' total is three times Connecticut - 21,441 refugees moving to the Bay State since 2001.

States with the largest number of refugees include California (102,614), Texas (81,765), New York (53,790), Florida (46,553), Minnesota (40,762), Washington (40,111), Arizona (39,031), Michigan (38,175), and Georgia (35,328).

There were nine states that had less than 500 refugees from a single country since October 2001:  Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, Hawaii, Mississippi, Montana West Virginia and Wyoming.

Migration Patterns Show Some Pluses as Population Numbers Decline

Connecticut's total population has declined over the past 3 years.  In fact, in 2016 Connecticut's total population fell below 2010 levels. New England and our neighboring states have also experienced an increase in people leaving. However, Connecticut has fallen the most post-recession, according to an analysis by the Connecticut Data Collaborative. International migration has helped, the data shows, but not enough to offset domestic out-migration.  Average international in-migration has grown 29% post-recession compared to pre-recession, but in terms of overall net migration, the state has seen an increased loss starting from 2012.

The state gains prime working age adults and children and also attracts well-educated international migrants, according to the analysis, and Connecticut loses the smallest percent of graduate degree holders. By income, the largest flows are at the lowest income levels (though largely due to age of earners), though the state is experiencing a slight loss of its highest income earners (incomes of $5 million or more).

Among the factors contribution to the population decline:

• Post-recession, Connecticut has about 14% fewer births each year compared to pre-recession averages. Increased deaths are also slightly contributing to Connecticut's overall population decline.
• Average domestic out-migration has increased by 55% post-recession compared to pre-recession, a difference of about 9,200 people.

Young adults move at a higher rate than the rest of the population (larger flows both in and out of Connecticut), and the state is losing young adults on net (18-29 year olds), but gaining working age adults (30-49 year olds), the Data Collaborative analysis shows.

Historically, Connecticut experienced population losses to other regions of the U.S. This is also true of New England in general. However, the recent declines in Connecticut's total population are primarily driven by increasing rates of net domestic out-migration and to a smaller degree a declining birth rate. But there are positive trends.

The state gains prime working age adults and children. Connecticut also attracts well-educated international migrants, and loses the smallest percent of graduate degree holders.  By income, the largest flows are at the lowest income levels (though largely due to age of earners), though the state is experiencing a slight loss of its highest income earners (incomes of $5 million or more).

Connecticut's domestic migration trends are now more like New York and New Jersey.  However domestic out-migration has more than doubled in Connecticut while New York and New Jersey are better than pre-recession, the researchers found.

Good News, Bad News in State Health-Related Data, Analysis Finds

Connecticut is 11^th best among states in the number of people who had no trouble finding a doctor in 2015, according to State Health Compare. The top 10 states were Minnesota, Kansas, Vermont, Utah, North Dakota, Montana, Maine, Nebraska, Hawaii and Tennessee.  That's the good news. But Connecticut is also 17^th worst among states in the percent of residents with high medical cost burdens, at 23.1 percent. Utah has the highest percentage at 27.5 percent; Maryland the lowest at 15.3 percent, among the 50 states.

According to the data, 70.7 percent of state residents had a general doctor or provider visit during the year, a lower percentage than the national average of 73 percent, and ranking the state 38th in the nation.  The data also reveal that Connecticut is 19^th lowest among states in the percent of state budget devoted to Medicaid, and 28^th lowest in state public health spending per person.

Nearly one in ten Connecticut residents (9.1 percent) spent the night in a hospital during the year, 15^th highest in the nation.

Created by SHADAC, State Health Compare is a new online comparison tool with state-level estimates across 46 measures of health and health care from six federal agency sources. SHADAC is a multidisciplinary health policy research center with a focus on state health policy, supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and affiliated with the Health Policy and Management Division of the School of Public Health at the University of Minnesota.

Categories in the database include health insurance coverage, cost of care, health behaviors, outcomes, access, utilization, quality of care, public health, and social and economic factors. Metrics include costs of potentially preventable hospitalizations, percent of residents who needed but did not get care due to cost, chronic disease prevalence, weight assessment in schools, and adult cancer screening rates.

Data for most measures is available for multiple years, allowing trend analysis. Within most of the 46 measures, the tool allows visitors to dive deeper into the data by subpopulations such as by age, race/ethnicity, and education level. The tool provides a map, state rank and trend display for each metric. The data can be downloaded and exported.

The data was recently featured in CT Health Notes, a biweekly informational newsletter of the Connecticut Health Policy Project. It includes research summaries, news, event notices, policy proposals and other issues important to Connecticut’s health policy.

Start-up Entrepreneurial Activity Boosts CT's Ranking from 22 to 18 Among Nation's 25 Smaller States

In a state-by-state analysis of start-up business activities, Connecticut moved from ranking 22^nd among the smallest 25 states a year ago to 18^th this year – the largest forward progress of any of the nation’s 25 smallest states.  Vermont also moved up four positions, from 13^th to 9^th.  And Kansas advanced three positions, from 18^th to 15^th. This year among the 25 smaller states, Nevada was top in startup activity, followed by Oklahoma, Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho. Among smaller states, eleven ranked higher than they did last year, five experienced no changes in rankings, and another nine ranked lower.

The analysis was included in the 2017 Kauffman Index Startup Activity State Report, issued this month by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, based in Kansas City.

Among the twenty-five largest states, the five states with the highest startup activity in the 2017 Index were California, Texas, Florida, Arizona, and Colorado. Seventeen out of the twenty-five largest states had higher levels of startup activity in 2017 compared to last year.  Among the twenty-five largest states, the four that experienced the biggest increase in ranks in 2017 were Massachusetts, Tennessee, Washington, and Minnesota. The three that experienced the biggest negative shifts in rank in 2017 compared to 2016 were Louisiana, Maryland, and Virginia.

After two years of large increases, startup activity rose slightly in 2016, continuing an upward trend started in 2014, the report indicated. Only three years ago, the Startup Activity Index was at its lowest point in the last twenty years. Today it has gone up three years in a row, reaching close to the peak before the Great Recession drop, the report pointed out.

Among the twenty-five smallest states, the three that experienced the biggest increase in ranks in 2017 were Connecticut, Vermont, and Kansas. The three that experienced the biggest negative shifts in rank in 2017 compared to 2016 were Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Delaware.  In the twenty-five smallest states, the five states with the highest startup activity in the 2017 Index were Nevada, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho. Eleven smaller states had higher Startup Activity Index measures this year.

The Startup Activity Index is an index measure of a broad range of startup activity in the United States across national, state, and metropolitan-area levels. The Startup Activity Index captures startup activity along three dimensions:

• The Rate of New Entrepreneurs in the economy— the percentage of adults becoming entrepreneurs in a given month.
• The Opportunity Share of New Entrepreneurs—the percentage of new entrepreneurs driven primarily by “opportunity” as opposed to “necessity.”
• Startup Density—the rate at which businesses with employees are created in the economy.

Immigration Is Key to Connecticut's Economic Strength, Report Shows

By 2014, Connecticut was home to almost half a million people who were born abroad.  In Connecticut, like the country as a whole, immigrants are currently punching far above their weight class as entrepreneurs, according to a report issued last year highlighting the impact of immigrants in the state. Foreign-born workers make up 21.3 percent of all entrepreneurs in the state, despite accounting for 13.7 percent of Connecticut’s population. Their firms generated $1.1 billion in business income in 2014, according to the report.

The report, “The Contributions of New Americans in Connecticut,” was prepared by the Partnership for a New American Economy, an organization that “brings together more than 500 Republican, Democratic and Independent mayors and business leaders who support sensible immigration reforms that will help create jobs for Americans.”

Immigrants are nothing new in Connecticut.  Even the Land of Steady Habits keeps changing.  In 1990, the state was already home to more than 279,000 immigrants, a group that made up 8.5 percent of Connecticut’s population overall. By 2010, the number of immigrants in this small state had grown to almost 473,000 people. By 2014, Connecticut was home to almost half a million people who were born abroad.

The report research also found:

• Of the 18 Fortune 500 firms based in the state, 50 percent have at least one founder who was an immigrant or the child of an immigrant. For the country as a whole, the equivalent figure is 41.4 percent.
• In Connecticut immigrants held $13.8 billion in spending power in 2014, defined in this brief as the net income available to a family after paying federal, state, and local taxes.
• In Connecticut 69.8 percent of the foreign-born population is working aged, defined in the report as between the ages 25 and 64, while only 50.8 percent of the native-born population is. That 19 percentage point gap has major implications for the state’s workforce.
• Foreign-born residents makeup more than one in three employees in the state’s computer systems design and related services industry. They also account for 32.2 percent of the state’s workers in medical equipment and supplies, contributing to Connecticut’s sizeable medical devices and supplies manufacturing industry, which generated more than $2.1 billion in sales in 2012.
• Despite making up 13.7 percent of the state’s population, foreign-born Connecticut residents made up 23.8 percent of STEM workers in the state in 2014.

Research for the report also found that in 2016 nearly one in three physicians in Connecticut graduated from a foreign medical school, “a likely sign they were born elsewhere.”  Only six other U.S. states had a higher share of foreign-educated physicians. Immigrant healthcare practitioners also made up 15.3 percent of the state’s nurses in 2014, as well as 29.5 percent of those working as nursing, psychiatric, or home health aides. Both those figures were higher than the national average.

Flexer Sees Bad Choices Ahead if State Doesn't "Do Something Dramatically Different"

“Connecticut’s got to do something dramatically different,” implored State Sen. Mae Flexer.  Her impassioned comments came as part of a panel discussion at the unveiling of the 2017 Kids Count Policy Report at the State Capitol.  With budget negotiations proceeding in earnest amidst a worsening state fiscal situation, Flexer expressed her concern about the forces driving the conversation at the Capitol, and the long-term implications for residents in the state’s rural and urban communities. “As I think about the days and the weeks ahead, I’m frustrated, because frankly, this building as far as I can tell right now, is being ruled by the voices of the people of the wealthy and suburban communities, and not by the voices of people (in these districts),” she said, following concerns raised by colleagues Rep. Brandon McGee (Hartford, Windsor) and Rep. Susan Johnson (Windham), who had focused on the significant disparities outlined in the report, and the adverse impact on children and families in Connecticut.   

“We’re not winning the battle,” said Flexer, who represents Killingly, Brooklyn, Canterbury, Mansfield, Putnam, Scotland, Thompson and Windham.  “And as I sit here and think about what this data should be leading us to do, and the reality of the choices that we are going to be making in the next couple weeks, we’re going to be making bad choices,” Flexer continued.

The 37-page report, “Race Equity in the Five Connecticuts: A Kids Count Special Report“ provided detailed analysis on the disparities in the state’s differing communities, described based on demographic data as being in one of five categories:  wealth, suburban, rural, urban periphery or urban core.   The report was published by the Connecticut Association for Human Services.

The stark differences, according to Chief Executive Officer Jim Horan, “are reflected not only in disparities in economic well-being, but in education, health, and family and community indicators.” The report found “there are persistent inequities in outcomes along racial and ethnic lines. Poverty rates differ starkly by race and ethnicity, as do other economic indicators, academic achievement (including graduation rates), and health outcomes.”

“We need to do things differently,” Flexer told those attending the May 15 panel discussion, one of two held back-to-back as part of the release of the report  that began with a detailed presentation of the report’s findings.  “The workforce training program (that you’re talking about) – it’s not going to exist in four or five years on the path that we’re taking right now in Connecticut of thinking that we have to do things the same way but not bringing anymore resources into the picture and not thinking of creative ways to allocate those resources is just going to make these statistics worse.  It’s going to make the outcomes for the communities that the three of us represent, worse.  It’s going to drive up rates of poverty, it’s going to make a study like this when it’s done again in five years even more stark of a contrast between the different regions.”

Noting that the towns of Chaplin, Hampton, Windham, Scotland, and Mansfield were one town early in the state’s history, Flexer asked “how much money would that save if that were still the case?  Is looking at our past the solution to what we need to do in the future, in a system with limited resources?”

Reflecting on the budget choices being discussed at the Capitol to reign in the multi-billion dollar deficit, Flexer expressed apprehension at some of the options under consideration.

“There are people who think that the Office of Early Childhood should no longer exist, that your commission [Commission on Children, Women and Seniors] should no longer exist, as a solution to Connecticut’s budget situation.  That throwing more families off of HUSKY insurance coverage is the answer to the problem we’re in the State of Connecticut,” Flexer said.

Flexer’s frustration and apprehension, however, was tinged with optimism.

“I’m so grateful to have this report and to have this conversation. I’m hopeful that people will look at what you’ve put together here and understand that we’ve got to do things differently and we can’t fail folks in … these communities.”

CT-N coverage

Five Connecticuts: Disparities Persist, Continue to Adversely Impact State's Children

Connecticut is among the wealthiest states in the country, and aggregated statewide economic, health, and education indicators suggest that children and families fare better here than in much of the United States. According to a new report developed by the Connecticut Association of Human Services, the reality on the ground is not what it appears to be. “Race Equity in the Five Connecticuts:  A Kids Count Special Report,” found that Blacks’ and Hispanics’ poverty rates are lower in Connecticut than nationally, and Blacks’ median incomes are higher. However, “as we have seen when looking within communities, historic patterns of inequality observed nationally do indeed persist here.”

The report indicates that as is the case nationally, Blacks and Hispanics in Connecticut are “disproportionately impoverished, and have the highest rates of negative outcomes for most of our indicators. Merely being a resident of one of the most affluent states in the U.S. is not a sufficient buffer against the intransigent inequality that affects our children and families along racial and ethnic lines,” the report explains.

"Not all children in our wealthy state are doing well," summed up Jim Horan, Chief Executive Officer of the Connecticut Association of Human Services, in releasing the report at a State Capitol complex conference. "All children, regardless of the color of their skin or their zip code, should have the opportunity to succeed. Connecticut can do much more to provide opportunity for all and address the huge inequities we see today, so that all children will prosper and contribute to and share in Connecticut’s growth," he said in the report's Foreword.

“Five Connecticut’s” refers to a breakdown developed by the Connecticut Data Center based upon each town’s median income, population density, and population below 100% of the poverty threshold (Levy, et al, 2004).

• Wealthy Connecticut towns have “exceptionally high-income, low poverty, and moderate population density.”
• Suburban towns have “above average income, low poverty, and moderate population density.”
• Rural towns are those with “average income, below average poverty, and the lowest population density.”
• Urban Periphery towns are marked by “below average income, average poverty, and high population density.”
• Urban Core towns have “the lowest income, highest poverty, and the highest population density.”

The report used data from communities representing each of the five Connecticuts:  Wealthy (New Canaan, W3ilton, Weston, Easton, Fairfield); Urban Periphery (East Hartford and Manchester); Urban core (Hartford); Suburban (Branford, East haven, North Branford, Guilford and Madison); and Rural (Ashford, Brooklyn, Canterbury, Chaplin, Eastford, Hampton, Killingly, Plainfield, Pomfret, Putnam, Scotland, Sterling, Thompson, Woodstock, and Windham).

“Blacks are more segregated in Connecticut than in Arkansas and Hispanics are more segregated than in Texas,” pointed out Orlando Rodriquez, research associate at the UConn Health Disparities Institute, speaking at a forum on the report at the Legislative Office Building, noting that Connecticut is among the nation’s most segregated states.

Demographically, Connecticut, like the nation, is becoming more racially and ethnically diverse. It is estimated that by 2055, America will not have a single racial or ethnic majority.  From 2000 to 2015, as the total population grew by 5%, Connecticut’s Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American populations combined grew by 42.3%. In 2000, Connecticut’s population was 22.5% Non-White; in 2015, it was 30.8%.

The research also found that “place can correlate somewhat with the degree of the differences observed across these indicators, with outcomes either ameliorated or exacerbated depending on one’s ‘Connecticut’ of residence.”

The general trend, the analysis indicated, “is that White and Asian children and families experience positive outcomes, while their Hispanic and Black counterparts are almost invariably worse off. Even in those areas where Hispanic and Black households have relatively higher median incomes, they often still have worse outcomes than White and Asian households for many non-economic indicators.”

“Place remains tightly intertwined with opportunity, compounding the effects we observe along racial lines,” the report indicated.

“While more affluent suburban towns offer safer neighborhoods and greater social and economic opportunity to residents,67 these neighborhoods and towns tend to have less affordable housing and perhaps less economic opportunity for employees of limited credentials. Finances tie less affluent families to areas of low opportunity, contributing to a cycle of poor outcomes.”

Officials said the report is intended to be the beginning of a “more nuanced and continuous conversation about the role of place in social and economic equity in the State of Connecticut,” to assist in the development of “policies that work earnestly to close the racial and ethnic gaps among our families and children.”

In 2000, Connecticut’s population totaled 3,405,565, with 2,638,845 non-Hispanic Whites, 309,843 Blacks, 320,323 Hispanics, 9,639 Native Americans, and 82,313 Asians. In 2015, the estimated total population was 3,593,222, with 2,478,119 non-Hispanic Whites, 346,206 non-Hispanic Blacks, 526,508 Hispanics, 8,908 Native Americans of any ethnicity, and 149,368 non-Hispanic Asians.

In New England, Most Believe At Least Half of High School Grads Not Ready for College, Career

New Englanders overwhelmingly believe that at least half of high school students across the region graduate unprepared for college and a career, and that student-centered learning environments are part of the solution to this readiness problem. That’s according to the results of a poll that reflects growing concerns that children are not fully equipped for life after high school.  It is seen by some as a tipping point in public opinion that positions student-centered learning—which tailors education to the interests and needs of each student—as an answer to providing young people with the skills and knowledge they need to succeed upon entering post-secondary education and the workforce.

That’s according to the Nellie Mae Education Foundation (Nellie Mae) which released the poll that was conducted by the Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy, which surveyed 2,400 individuals across the region from August 5-31, 2016.

“Although graduation rates are at an all-time high, New Englanders are well aware that a diploma alone is no longer sufficient to ensure success for our students after high school,” said Nick Donohue, president & CEO of the Nellie Mae Education Foundation.

Among Connecticut residents, 33% said most graduates are prepared for college and a career, 48% said about half of graduates are ready, and 18% believe that “few graduates” are prepared for college and career.  Connecticut and New Hampshire had the highest percentage indicating that “most graduates” are prepared, with one-third of respondents (33%) expressing that view.

“Too frequently students arrive at college requiring developmental or remedial classes to strengthen basic skills just to move on to college-level material, or they begin careers without the tools and skills necessary to help them early on in their professional lives. The situation is more severe for people in traditionally marginalized communities – places that we need to prosper so our society can advance. The good news is that student-centered approaches to learning represent a path forward in which all students can succeed.”

There were some differences among the states.  In Connecticut, 48 percent said “some changes are needed, but basically schools should be kept the same.”  Only 14 percent said “public schools work well as they are now,” while 30 percent said “major changes are needed” and 8 percent said “a complete overhaul is needed” (the smallest percentage among the New England states).

A significantly greater proportion in Rhode Island believe “a complete overhaul is needed” than in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont.   A significantly greater proportion in Maine believe “a complete overhaul is needed” than in Connecticut.

Nearly two-thirds of those surveyed in Connecticut (64%) called for “using technology to enhance the way students learn in the classroom” – the highest percentage among the six New England states.  A majority called for “more significant efforts to close achievement gaps” (59%), more effective teachers (62%) and changes to the ways schools are funded (57%).  The state legislature in Connecticut is currently considering changes in the school funding formula proposed by Gov. Malloy in the wake of a state court decision.

According to Nellie Mae, across New England, only 50 percent of high school students are graduating with the skills and knowledge necessary to succeed after high school. These poll results show that New Englanders not only agree this is unacceptable, but that 90 percent believe that student-centered learning environments are part of the solution toward ensuring high school graduates are college and career ready.

Nellie Mae defines student-centered learning as personalized and happening anywhere, anytime. In student-centered environments, students move ahead based on mastery of content rather than class-seat time and they exert ownership over their own learning.

New Englanders found teachers to be among the most trusted group when it comes to educational decision-making and showed confidence in their ability to improve public education. Respondents also reported having confidence in parents and school and district leaders for improving education.

The poll comes amidst efforts by Nellie Mae to reshape public education in New England to reach an aggressive benchmark of 80 percent college and career readiness among our high school graduates by 2030. The Foundation is investing $200 million in grantmaking efforts toward advancing student-centered learning in schools and districts across the region in order to achieve this goal.

The Nellie Mae Education Foundation is the largest philanthropic organization in New England that focuses exclusively on education.

To read the poll report in its entirety, please visit http://bit.ly/2k4Dvv5