PERSPECTIVE: Move over Oprah - Giving to Women’s and Girls’ Causes is Growing (and is a Rising Force for Good)

by Carol Buckheit What role do philanthropic funds supporting women’s and girls’ causes play in creating change in Connecticut communities? Increasingly, a big one.

According to the Connecticut Council for Philanthropy, the first women’s fund in Connecticut was established in 1993, formed to gather and distribute dollars to improve the lives of women and girls and inform women about the most pressing issues affecting them in their local communities. Connecticut Community Foundation’s  Women’s Fund, serving the Greater Waterbury and Litchfield Hills region, is one of 12 such funds in the Nutmeg State. The Council reported that the combined assets of these women’s funds in Connecticut have grown dramatically, increasing more than six-fold from $2.9 million in 2002 to $18.7 million in 2011.

Nationally, the numbers are even more startling. Between 1990 and 2006, U.S. foundation giving to benefit women and girls (including international grants) grew from $412 million to $2.1 billion, an increase that surpassed the rate of growth for all foundation giving.

Connecticut funders (nearly all of them community foundations) have granted millions of dollars from women’s and girls’ funds to organizations tackling issues uniquely affecting women and girls, including prevention and treatment of eating disorders, dating violence, teenage pregnancy and domestic violence.

Our work, and focus, continues.

In the 21-town Greater Waterbury and Litchfield Hills area served by Connecticut Community Foundation, recent Women’s Fund grantees have included the Susan B. Anthony Project and Waterbury Youth Services. Each endeavors to build girls’ self-esteem and resiliency through programs sensitively developed just for girls, whether through supportive group therapy for girls in residential care or ensuring girls are connected to strong female role models in fulfilling careers.

New research bodes well for the continued growth of women’s funds and, most importantly, their influence in improving the lives of women and girls.

Data from a new study—the first academic research examining who gives to women and girls causes and what motivates donors to give—was released in May 2016 by the Women’s Philanthropy Institute (WPI) at the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy.

The encouraging news: Large percentages of female and male survey respondents (50% and 40%, respectively) reported donating to causes primarily affecting women and girls.  Women reported investing in these causes based on their personal experiences, including experiencing discrimination and having children, and because they believe that supporting those causes leads to the greatest social return to all of society.

An in-depth analysis of giving to women’s funds by the Foundation Center and Women’s Funding Network suggests this belief is valid, pointing to real and significant systemic changes worldwide in areas such as education, health and economic growth.

But, there’s even better news from WPI’s research for the women’s funds in Connecticut, particularly those hosted by community foundations like ours: donors trust us and are looking to us to gain a deeper understanding of issues affecting women and girls in local communities.

The authors discussed, “Our research showed that existing donors were highly complimentary of the women’s funds they supported, seeing them as a locus of expertise in their communities with the ability to make both local and systemic changes.”(p. 35).  Donors indicated that they were intentional about their giving, sought specific impacts, and trusted the women’s funds to deliver desired results.

“As more and more people make the connection between giving to women and societal change, we can see that giving to women and girls is not just a temporary trend but is here to stay,” said lead author of the study, Debra Mesch, Ph.D., director of the Women’s Philanthropy Institute. “Understanding the demographics and motivations of those who are giving to women’s and girls’ causes is increasingly important if we are to improve the lives of women and girls, and their families and communities.”

Indeed.

______________________________________

Carol Buckheit is Senior Communications Officer at the Connecticut Community Foundation.  Established in 1923, Connecticut Community Foundation fosters creative partnerships that build rewarding lives and thriving communities in 21 towns in Greater Waterbury and the Litchfield Hills. The Foundation provides leadership in addressing the region’s critical issues, strengthens local nonprofit organizations through grants and technical assistance programs, and works with individuals, families and corporations to establish and steward scholarships and charitable funds.

PERSPECTIVE commentaries by contributing writers appear each Sunday on Connecticut by the Numbers.

Teen Safe Driver Week Observed in Connecticut; Car Crashes Are #1 Killer of Teens

Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for U.S. teens according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  In 2014, 2,270 teens in the United States ages 16–19 were killed and 221,313 were treated in emergency departments for injuries suffered in motor vehicle crashes. That means that six teens ages 16–19 died every day from motor vehicle injuries.

Those stark statistics provide the backdrop for the observance of National Teen Safe Driver week, which runs through Saturday,in Connecticut and nationwide. The week-long observance, through October 22,  brings that message to communities across the state by reminding them safety must come first.  Connecticut adopted in 2008 more stringent teen driving laws to raise awareness and reduce crashes, injuries and deaths. The state has seen an 82-percent reduction in fatalities for 16 and 17 year-old drivers from a high of 11 in 2002 and to an average of two per year since the tougher laws began.

"As long as motor vehicle crashes remain one of the leading causes of death for American teenagers, everyone needs to do their part to ensure our youngest, and most inexperienced drivers have the knowledge to make responsible decisions when they get behind a wheel," said Governor Dannel P. Malloy. State Attorney General George Jepsen said, "National Teen Driver Safety Week is a great time to encourage conversations with new and soon-to-be drivers about the importance of safe driving habits. Parents, teachers, advocates and even peers all play a role in helping to make sure that teens make safe choices when operating motor vehicles."

Members of the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) Teen Advisory Board said the week is important for a variety of reasons, and encourages teens to play an active role in promoting safety behind the wheel.  The risk of motor vehicle crashes is higher among 16-19-year-olds than among any other age group, CDC data indicates. In fact, per mile driven, teen drivers ages 16 to 19 are nearly three times more likely than drivers aged 20 and older to be in a fatal crash.

“One second represents when we make a driving decision, be it a good or bad one,” said Armani Nieves, a senior at Hall High School in West Hartford and member of the DMV Teen Advisory Board.  “It only takes one second to be a good or bad driver.”

Maggie Silbo, a junior at Mercy High School and a member of the teen advisory board, said teen drivers can lead by example in many ways.  “To be safe drivers, teens should follow the rules of the road, such as not talking or texting on the phone, obeying the posted speed limits and following the passenger restriction laws,” Silbo said.  Angela Zhu, a senior at Cheshire High School, said teenagers can play an active role as responsible passengers.“It's all about awareness,” said Zhu, also a member of the DMV Teen Advisory Board.  “All it takes is one small sentence.  If you really care about your friends, simply tell them to put down the phone.”

Compared with other age groups, teens have among the lowest rates of seat belt use. In 2015, only 61% of high school students reported they always wear seat belts when riding with someone else. Teens are also more likely than older drivers to underestimate dangerous situations or not be able to recognize hazardous situations, and more likely than adults to make critical decision errors that lead to serious crashes, according to the CDC.

The DMV Teen Advisory Board also came up with the theme for this year’s DMV-Travelers Teen Safe Driving Video contest:  “One Split Second…”  The board designed the theme to engage teens to produce a video on how a split-second decision related to driving can make a difference in the lives of these youngest drivers.

“I believe it is crucial to promote the message of safe driving for teens, especially as there are even more distractions on the road today,” said Kojo Appiah, a senior at Xavier High School in Middletown and a member of the  DMV Teen Advisory Board.  “This video contest is an exciting activity that teens can do with your peers while learning the life lessons and responsibilities of being a safe driver.”

DMV Commissioner Michael Bzdyra said this week is a great time for parents to review the state’s teen driving laws (http://ct.gov/teendriving/laws) and create a safe driving agreement (http://1.usa.gov/1MA7miP) with their teens. “This is an important week because it’s a reminder to teens, parents and communities who can all be positive influences for safe driving in a variety of ways,” Commissioner Bzdyra said.   “This is a great time to discuss safe driving at home, in the classroom or anywhere else to promote good choices related to driving and help ensure teens follow the rules of the road.”

Almond Joy, Born in Connecticut, Is State's Candy Sales Champion

Almond Joy, Milky Way and M&Ms are the likely candies to be greeting Connecticut trick-or-treaters as they move from door to door later this month.  That’s according to candystore.com, which sells bulk candy on-line, in their review of sales data from 2007 through 2015. Connecticut's favorite Halloween candy is Almond Joy, with 2,619 pounds of it, on average, ordered each year, the website indicated. Milky Way is Connecticut's second favorite Halloween candy, with 1,366 pounds ordered. M&M's placed third, at 910 pounds on average.

Among Connecticut’s neighboring states, the candy favorite in Massachusetts is Butterfingers; in New York it is Sour Patch Kids, in Rhode Island candy corn topped the list.  Connecticut was the only state where Almond Joy ranked first in candy sales.

Industry research shows that since 2015, online candy sales have increased by 15 percent, according to candystore.com.

The Almond Joy candy bar was introduced in 1946, just after the World War II, when sugar, tropical coconuts and chocolate became more readily available, by the New Haven-based Peter Paul Manufacturing Company,  which was already well-known for its popular Mounds bar introduced in 1921. Today, the Peter Paul Candy Manufacturing Company is a candy-making division within the Hershey Company. It was originally founded in the Elm City in 1919 by six Armenian immigrants led by Peter Paul Halajian, with a manufacturing plant in nearby Naugatuck.

"Almond Joy has seen a resurgence in popularity over the past few years.  No where is that more apparent than Connecticut.  While it cracked the top 3 in a few other states (MN, SD, TX), it was the #1 candy in Connecticut, " said co-CEO of CandyStore.com, Tom Hoeck.

CandyStore.com is an industry leader in candy sales in the United States and Canada, and offers candies of all shapes, sizes, colors, and brands. To determine the best sellers by state, the company reviewed sales from 2007–2015, focusing on the three months leading up to Halloween.

“Since we sell candy to all 50 states (and Canada), it was easy for us to see a state-by-state breakdown of candy trends and top orders. And we have relationships with all the major candy companies, so they helped us verify as well. Based on this analysis, we determined the Halloween best-sellers that people all over the country love to use in Halloween crafts and treats and give out to trick-or-treaters.”

The company also provides “candy trivia” on its website, noting that during the 1981 inauguration of Ronald Reagan, three tons of jelly beans were served, candy corn is the top selling candy, and two-thirds of American candy bars were introduced more than 50 years ago.

Nationwide, Parents Seek Expanded Health Curriculum in Schools

In Connecticut, a planned, sequential PK-12 Coordinated School Health (CSH) education curriculum is a system designed to addresses the physical, mental, emotional and social dimensions of health.  CSH aims to improve students’ health and their capacity to learn through the support of families, communities and schools working together. A new nationwide survey indicates that the broader, comprehensive definition of health education is precisely what families are seeking in the health education of children.  Teaching kids about drugs, alcohol and sex appears to be less controversial than ever before with the majority of parents in a new poll saying schools should and do teach these subjects.

Many parents want more — saying those topics are not enough — finds the University of Michigan C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital National Poll on Children’s Health. Researchers surveyed a nationally representative sample of parents with kids in middle or high school. Two-thirds of parents polled say schools should definitely cover emotional and mental health issues — which may include such subjects as dealing with depression, stress and bullying — yet only a third say these topics are currently covered by their child’s school.  Another 68 percent of parents want to see schools cover basic first aid, and 63 percent say kids should learn CPR.

A coordinated approach to school health aligns health and education efforts and leads to improved physical, mental and developmental outcomes for students, according to the State Department of Education (SDE) website. The department’s overview of the program indicates that “Students’ physical, social and emotional development requires the same level of ongoing assessment and support as their academic development.”

“Research has consistently concluded that student health and academic achievement are directly connected and, in fact, that student health is one of the most significant influences on learning and achievement,” SDE points out.

In the national survey, parents “clearly perceive a gap between what their children need and what they are receiving in the area of mental health education, as well as basic first aid and CPR,” says Sarah Clark, M.P.H., co-director of the C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital National Poll on Children’s Health.  “We are seeing increasing concerns for such issues as stress, depression and suicide among young people, and parents want schools to be a part of the solution. These results suggest that the stigma of mental health issues may have relaxed among today’s parents, in favor of using a broad array of resources to help children and adolescents with these critical areas.”

The Connecticut curriculum is designed to “motivate children and youth to maintain and improve their health, prevent disease, reduce health-related risk behaviors and develop and demonstrate health-related knowledge, attitudes, skills and practices.”

Nearly four in 10 parents (39 percent) in the Mott survey believe schools should educate students on how to use the health care system. But only one in 10 parents say the topic is covered in their child’s school. Low-income parents are more likely to say schools should teach students how to use the health care system—perhaps, Clark notes, because these parents face challenges themselves in accessing health care.  The survey does not include a state-by-state breakdown of the data.

PERSPECTIVE: The Connecticut Job Swap – An Economy in Transition

by Derek Thomas and Ray Noonan During the past 15 years, Connecticut’s economy has experienced a “job swap” – jobs lost in high-wage industries were replaced with jobs gained in low-wage ones.

As a result, from 2001 to 2015, the share of Connecticut’s private sector jobs in low-wage industries increased by 20 percent, while the share in high-wage industries decreased by 13 percent. This helps explain why a growing number of families, even after a full week of hard work, are forced to choose between groceries and rent, or between childcare and transportation costs.

Why did this shift occur? Like many Northeastern and Midwestern states, Connecticut lost tens-of-thousands of manufacturing jobs before the recession, as a result of several factors, including currency manipulation and technological improvements in response to global competition. Although jobs in manufacturing industries accounted for 15 percent of Connecticut’s private sector jobs in 2001, they accounted for two-thirds of net losses in high-wage industries from 2001–2007. The nearly 22,000 jobs lost in high-wage manufacturing industries during this period dwarfed the growth of less than 1,500 jobs added in the financial and insurance industry.

During the recession, industries across all wage categories experienced net losses with a total net loss of more than 85,000 jobs – nearly 6 percent of total private sector jobs. More than 97 percent of total losses were in mid- and high-wage industries. Manufacturing continued to experience disproportionate losses, accounting for almost 30 percent of all jobs lost during this period. The construction industry accounted for another 20 percent, with administrative and waste services industries (composed largely of janitors, laborers, office clerks) accounting for 13 percent of losses.

This leaves us where we are today. The most recent data, from 2015, indicates that 24.5 percent of Connecticut’s private sector jobs are in low-wage industries, paying on average less than $15 per hour ($31,200 annually). That’s barely enough to be considered a living wage for a single adult in Connecticut, let alone enough to support a family. These jobs are concentrated in the food services, social assistance, and retail industries, and they offer fewer benefits, predictability, and flexibility as well as little opportunity for career growth.

Jobs in high-wage industries, paying at least $33.95 per hour ($70,616 annually) on average accounted for 31.4 percent of total private sector jobs in 2015. Since 2001, the state experienced a net loss of 66,000 positions in these industries, including 33,225 jobs before and 38,617 jobs during the recession.

The good news is that, in spite of the high-wage for low-wage job swap, the share of mid-wage industries in Connecticut has remained constant over the last 15 years – accounting for 44.1 percent of total private sector jobs in 2015.

Other recent trends are also encouraging. As of 2015, the rate at which jobs in high-wage industries declined as a share of all private sector jobs was closer to zero last year than at any point since 2010. Similarly, the rate at which jobs in low-wage industries grew as a share of all private sector jobs was near zero in 2015. These trends, along with recent announcements from Electric Boat, Pratt & Whitney, and Sikorsky suggest the 15-year trend could be reversing.

 These recent trends also demonstrate that, in spite of the shifting economy, a strong foundation of mid- and high-wage jobs exists moving forward: as a result of investments in human capital, the state still boasts a high-quality workforce. Moreover, a greater share of the state’s workforce participates in the labor force (meaning they are working or looking for work) than the U.S. and all peer states. Our workers are the fourth most productive in the nation.

Nonetheless, this decade-and-a-half long swap should be matched with equivalent policy responses. For starters, lawmakers should give careful consideration to workforce investments that stimulate growth in high-wage industries when setting upcoming budget priorities. In addition, to help working families close the gap between low wages and the cost of supporting a family, lawmakers should strengthen investments in childcare, restore the state’s full EITC, and raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour. Lastly, scarce resources mandate that state spending of more than $7 billion on tax expenditures should be evaluated and subject to routine public scrutiny  just as it is for spending on schools, transportation and services.

________________________________________

Derek Thomas is the Fiscal Policy Fellow at Connecticut Voices for Children. Ray Noonan is an Associate Policy Fellow at Connecticut Voices for Children. Their research is focused on how Connecticut’s fiscal policies and budget trends affect children and families. This article is based on their work on the “State of Working Connecticut” report. All the data is available at Connecticut Voices for Children’s website.

PERSPECTIVE commentaries by contributing writers appear each Sunday on Connecticut by the Numbers.

CT Has Nation's 10th Lowest Rate of Cigarette Smoking

West Virginia had the highest prevalence of cigarette use in the United States, according to a new CDC study.  Utah had the lowest, and Connecticut had the 10^th lowest rate. Using data from the 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC determined that the prevalence of cigarette use in West Virginia was 26.7%, while the lowest rate was 9.7% in Utah.  In Connecticut the rate of cigarette use was 15.4 percent.

CDC recommended that continued implementation of proven population-based interventions, such as increasing tobacco product prices and enforcing comprehensive smoke-free laws, and increasing access to evidence-based clinical interventions can help reduce tobacco use.

"These findings highlight the importance of enhanced implementation of evidence-based strategies to help smokers and other tobacco users quit completely," CDC said.

Cigarette smoking was significantly higher among males than females in 34 states. Among males, cigarette smoking ranged from 11.2% (Utah) to 27.8% (West Virginia), and among females, from 8.2% (Utah) to 25.6% (West Virginia).

The report also indicated that the prevalence of smokeless tobacco use ranged from 1.4% (Hawaii) to 8.8% (Wyoming). It was 1.8 percent in Connecticut.

Prevalence of any cigarette and/or smokeless tobacco use ranged from 11.3% (Utah) to 32.2% (West Virginia).  Connecticut was 15.3 percent.

The CDC also indicated that the prevalence of any cigarette and/or smokeless tobacco use differed significantly by race/ethnicity in 21 states. Prevalence was highest among whites in eight states (Arizona, Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia), followed by adults of non-Hispanic other races in six states (Arkansas, Florida, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and South Carolina), blacks in five states (California, Illinois, Indiana, New Jersey, and Wisconsin), and Hispanics in two states (Connecticut and Michigan).

The report was issued last week from the CDC.  The report concluded that “continued implementation of proven population-based interventions, including increasing tobacco product prices, implementing and enforcing comprehensive smoke-free laws, warning about the dangers of tobacco use through mass media campaigns, and increasing access to evidence-based clinical interventions (including behavioral counseling and FDA-approved medication), can help reduce tobacco use, particularly in populations with the highest use prevalence.”

Obesity Rate Climbs in Connecticut, Is Among the Nation's Lowest

Connecticut now has the 10th lowest adult obesity rate in the nation, according to The State of Obesity: Better Policies for a Healthier America. Connecticut's adult obesity rate is currently 25.3 percent, up from 16.0 percent in 2000 and from 10.4 percent in 1990.

According to the most recent data, adult obesity rates now exceed 35 percent in four states, 30 percent in 25 states and are above 20 percent in all states. Louisiana has the highest adult obesity rate at 36.2 percent and Colorado has the lowest at 20.2 percent.

U.S. adult obesity rates decreased in four states (Minnesota, Montana, New York and Ohio), increased in two (Kansas and Kentucky) and remained stable in the rest, between 2014 and 2015. This marks the first time in the past decade that any states have experienced decreases — aside from a decline in Washington, D.C. in 2010.

The data, released in September 2016 by the Trust for America’s Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, reflects information compiled nationwide in 2015.

Connecticut’s childhood obesity rates are 15.8 percent for 2-to-4 year olds from low-income families, 15 percent of 10-17 year olds, and 12.3 percent of high school students.

Regarding obesity-related health issues, Connecticut ranked 31^st among the states in the current adult diabetes rate, which is 9.3 percent, and 30^th in hypertension at 30.4 percent of the population. 

In 1985, no state had an adult obesity rate higher than 15 percent; in 1991, no state was over 20 percent; in 2000, no state was over 25 percent; and, in 2006, only Mississippi and West Virginia were above 31 percent.  Nationwide, obesity rates are higher among women (40.4 percent) compared to men (35.0 percent).

Efforts to Improve Math Education in CT Don't Yet Add Up, Report Finds

If Connecticut students are to excel in math, it will take a concerted effort at the state and district level, revised curriculum by state colleges preparing math teachers, and greater community involvement.  That overall effort, according to a new state report, still has a ways to go. The 30-member Commissioner’s Council on Mathematics report, issued last week, outlines recommendations for educators, policy leaders, and community members to improve K-12 mathematics education in the state.  The report stresses several recommendations that are grounded in the lessons learned regarding strong leadership, quality professional development, dedicated time, and effective collaboration within, among, and beyond school districts.

The council outlines several specific actions for the State Department of Education, individual school districts, higher education, and the community in the report that are distilled into four broad recommendations. Each recommendation is evidence-based, actionable, inclusive of all stakeholders, and measurable.

The four broad recommendations are:

• develop a clear and consistent understanding of the Connecticut Core Standards-Mathematics (CCS-M) at the classroom, school, district, and state levels;
• provide the support and training necessary to effectively implement the mathematics standards with fidelity in all classrooms, schools, and districts;
• implement appropriate interventions and acceleration to support the needs of a diverse group of learners; and
• engage all stakeholders in the process of putting the Connecticut Core Standards-Mathematics into practice through effective communication that keeps teachers, parents and community members informed and participating in the process.

“Every student deserves the opportunity to receive a math education that is rich and rigorous, and equips them with the skills needed to graduate from high school prepared to be successful in both college and career,” said Commissioner Wentzell. “These recommendations by the Council on Mathematics have created a clear path that will help the State Department of Education take the steps needed to ensure that every student in our state receives a high-quality mathematics education.”

Next steps identified in the report include that “all stakeholders need to work and learn more in the area of mathematics education,” specifically as it relates to the following:

• instructional support necessary for students with special needs to access the standards;
• instructional support necessary for English learners to access the standards;
• interconnectedness of curriculum, instruction, and assessment; and
• teacher evaluation and certification requirements.

The framework for the recommendations was a logic model described as four buckets: Deep Knowledge of the CCS-M, Curriculum Development and Implementation, Intervention and Acceleration, Community and Family Engagement.

The Commissioner’s Council on Mathematics was initiated by Commissioner Wentzell in 2015 in response to the Smarter Balanced test results in mathematics. The council was convened to spearhead the state’s efforts to improve supports in mathematics by identifying best practices and exploring promising innovations in mathematics instruction.

Communities are urged, in some of the recommendations, to establish partnerships with local districts to create internships for high school students with businesses that require mathematics skills, use social media and distribution lists to promote the importance of the CCS-M, and urge community members to attend and participate in state- and district-provided workshops that deliver information about the standards.

Among a series of recommendations aimed at higher education, colleges are urged to:

• Increase mathematics coursework for elementary pre-service teachers.
• Increase coursework that focuses on the mathematical practices at all levels.
• Collaborate with district partners to ensure that pre-service teachers’ field experience is with a teacher who exhibits conceptual understanding, deep content knowledge, and effective use of the practices.
• Mentor teachers and provide training specific to mathematics content and pedagogy to teachers who will be assigned a pre-service teacher.
• Create professional learning workshops for in-service teachers to interact with professors at the university to make the connections of what is being taught at the K-12 level and how it is used in higher education.
• Build relationships with high schools by promoting early college experiences in high schools
• Require coursework in family engagement strategies for pre-service teachers.

Council members included parents, teachers, curriculum specialists, principals, superintendents, board of education members, higher education professors, business leaders, and State Department of Education staff members with the purpose of closely examining the current state of mathematics education in Connecticut.

The Commissioner selected the members through recommendations made by various stakeholder groups across the state, including the Connecticut Parent Teacher Association (CT-PTA), the American Federation of Teachers-Connecticut (AFT-CT), the Connecticut Education Association (CEA), the Connecticut Association of Schools (CAS), the Connecticut Business & Industry Association (CBIA), and the Connecticut State Department of Education (CSDE).  They met monthly from February 2016 to June 2016, and the recommendations were developed with the input of local school districts, higher education, and experts in family and community relations, according to the report.

CT Families Continue to Struggle Financially, United Way Report Reveals

More Connecticut households are struggling to pay for their most basic needs, according to a new report from United Way.  More than one out of four households - in one of the wealthiest states in the U.S. - are employed, yet still fall below what is needed to thrive financially.  That is an increase in both the number and percentage of such households in 2014 as compared with 2012, according to the updated ALICE report. Two years ago, United Ways introduced ALICE, which stands for - Asset Limited Income Constrained Employed - to place a spotlight on a large population of residents who are working, but have difficulty affording the basic necessities of housing, food, child care, health care and transportation.

In those two years, the problem has grown worse, even has the recession has given way to a slow economic recovery, in Connecticut and nationwide.  ALICE and poverty households combined account for 38 percent of households in the state that struggle to make ends meet.

A total of 361,521 Connecticut households fall into what the study describes as the ALICE population. These are households earning more than the official U.S. poverty level, but less than the basic cost of living. This is more than 2.5 times the number of households that fall below the federal poverty level. ALICE households make up 20% or more of all households in 114 (67%) of Connecticut’s 169 cities and towns.

The highest levels (ALICE and poverty households) were in Hartford (74%), New Haven (65%), Waterbury (63%), Bridgeport (63%) and New Britain (63%).  Also above 50 percent are Meriden, West Haven, East Hartford and New London.  From 2007 to 2014, two cities, Danbury and Waterbury, saw their total household population decrease, by 7 and 9 percent respectively, while the rest experienced an increase in households, with the largest increase of 8 percent in Stamford, according to the report. The number of household below the ALICE Threshold increased in every one of the nine largest cities and towns with Norwalk seeing the largest percent increase (38 percent).

While the prevalence of low-wage jobs still defines Connecticut’s economy for ALICE, for the first time in the past decade, the percent of jobs paying less than $20 per hour fell below 50 percent of all jobs.  The report also highlights a number of trends in Connecticut, including:

• The population is aging, and many seniors do not have the resources they need to support themselves.

• Differences by race and ethnicity persist and ethnicity persist, creating challenges for many ALICE families, as well as for immigrants in Connecticut.
• Low-wage jobs are projected to grow faster than higher-wage jobs over the next decade.
• Technology is changing the workplace, adding some jobs, replacing many others, while also changing where people work, the hours they work, and skills required. The report notes that technology creates opportunities as well as challenges for ALICE workers.

For the first time, an online simulator is also available to experience the financial challenges that ALICE households in Connecticut face at www.MakingToughChoices.org.  The updated Report uses data from a variety of sources, including the U.S. Census and the American Community Survey to provide tools that quantify the number of households in Connecticut's workforce that are struggling financially. The updated United Way ALICE Report reveals:

• The composition of the ALICE population is men and women, young and old, of all races.
• The breakdown of jobs in Connecticut by hourly wage (51% of jobs pay more than $20/hour) compared to what it costs to survive for a family of four (2 adults, 1 infant, 1 preschooler) - $70,788.
• Every city and town in Connecticut has ALICE households. More than two-thirds of Connecticut's cities and towns have at least 1 in 5 households that fit the ALICE definition for financial hardship.

Poverty and ALICE households exist in every racial and ethnic group in Connecticut, but the largest numbers are among White non-Hispanic households. There were about one million White households in 2014, compared to 328,000 households of color (Figure 4 shows the populations of color for whom there is income data: Hispanic, Black and Asian). However, these groups made up a proportionally larger share of households both in poverty and ALICE: 64 percent of Hispanic households, 58 percent of Black households, and 30 percent of Asian households had income below the ALICE Threshold in 2014, compared to 31 percent of White households.

The largest population of color in Connecticut, Hispanics, has been growing since 2007, totaling 156,837 households in 2014, a 25 percent increase. As the number of Hispanic households increased, so did the number and proportion of Hispanics living below the ALICE threshold. The percentage of Hispanic ALICE households rose from 34 percent in 2007 to 39 percent in 2010 and then to 43 percent in 2014. Together Hispanic households in poverty and ALICE made up more than two-thirds of Hispanic households in 2014.

There are some signs of improvement in the education gap among racial and ethnic groups, suggesting that some structural changes are occurring in Connecticut. In K-12 education, the Education Equality Index (EEI) shows that the achievement gap – the disparity in educational measures between socioeconomic and racial or ethnic groups – narrowed slightly between 2011 and 2014 in Connecticut.

Achievement gaps impact graduation rates and college performance. Among the Class of 2013, 64 percent of Black students and 59 percent of Hispanic students in the state went on to college within a year after graduating from high school, compared to 78 percent of White students. They also had lower 6-year college graduation rates: While 54 percent of White students got a college degree within 6 years, only 24 percent of Black students and 21 percent of Hispanic students did the same (Connecticut State Department of Education, 2015).

The updated ALICE Report recommends both short-term and long-term strategies to help ALICE families and strengthen our communities. United Ways work with many community partners to provide support to ALICE families to help them get through a crisis and avoid a downward spiral into even worse circumstances such as homelessness as well as assisting with financial literacy, education and workforce readiness.

Further, United Ways in Connecticut have invested more than $8.5 million in child care and early learning; $1.3 million in housing and homeless prevention work; $5 million in basic needs programs; and, have assisted working families in obtaining nearly $40 million in EITC and tax refunds and credits in 2016.

The updated Connecticut ALICE Report was funded by the 16 Connecticut United Ways. For more information or to find data about ALICE in local communities, visit http://alice.ctunitedway.org.  Connecticut United Ways are joining with United Ways in fifteen other states to provide statewide ALICE Reports. The updated Connecticut ALICE Report provides analysis of how many households are struggling in every town, and what it costs to pay for basic necessities in different parts of the state (Household Survival Budget).

https://youtu.be/u7gPJGu2psw

 [2014 ALICE introductory video]

PERSPECTIVE: New Economic Perspectives on the I-91 Knowledge Corridor

by Don Klepper-Smith Today, as I look out over our economic landscape in mid-2016, and given recent developments, I believe there is enough evidence to suggest that the odds of a U.S. recession over the next 12-18 months have risen to roughly 30-40 percent.

During our last recession, the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) did not make the official call until December 2008, a full year after the recession began, and after the November 2008 presidential election. So given the 2016 presidential election and the current political environment, it is highly unlikely that the so called "R- word" will be formally uttered by NBER before the end of 2016.

If there's one thing I've learned in my 35 years of being a professional economist, it's that once the dominos start falling in a given direction, either to the upside or the downside, expect them to do more of the same. In other words, the economic status quo always perpetuates itself.

Good news begets good news, and bad news begets more bad news. The trick is in discerning the "turning point", which has so many intangibles attached to it. Bottom line: We are clearly starting to see cracks in our economic recovery, but recession is not a foregone conclusion.

Essentially, structural change relates to those factors within the domestic economy which are NOT related to, and operate independent of, the U.S. business cycle. Structural changes have to be understood in their scope and magnitude in impacting today’s economy because many of these same factors will also be affecting future levels of growth.

Often unappreciated by federal and state policymakers, these structural changes have had profound and significant effects on levels of economic growth and have vastly reshaped our economic landscape over time. As a result, policy options are far more complicated and challenging.

The good news is that the current U.S. expansion is seven years old this summer, a bit longer than the average post-war recovery of five years. Despite all the rhetoric and cheerleading, the domestic economy grew just 1.7%, 2.4% and 2.6% respectively over the last three years, about a half a percent below our long-term average. In fact, the last time we saw “average growth of 3%” was in 2005. Today, the economic fundamentals clearly argue for another year of “modest growth” in the range of 2%, but red flags are starting to appear.

Importantly, the traditional tools for stimulating the domestic economy - monetary and fiscal policy - have either been exhausted, or are politically unpalatable as of mid-2016.  Here’s the bottom line:  With little means to stimulate the U.S. economy, the overall economy is poised for just modest, below-average, real GDP growth in the 2%-2.5% range for both 2016 and 2017.

In Connecticut, there's clearly been an escalating "crisis of confidence" in the state's business community that's been long ignored, and it's not going to turn around quickly. Research shows that both business confidence and consumer confidence don't turn on a dime, and that it takes many years to rebuild confidence once it's lost.

The present lack of fiscal discipline in state and local finances is clearly one contributing factor. With State and local budgets climbing three, four and five percent annually, and those on fixed incomes earning one to two percent, it doesn't take a degree in math to understand that "mounting fiscal stress" is already baked into Connecticut's fiscal picture over the next ten to fifteen years.

Inform CT is a public-private partnership that provides independent, nonpartisan research, analysis and public outreach.  Highlights of the August 2016 Inform CT survey results include:

• 40% of the state’s residents say they are likely to move out of state within the next five years.
• More significantly, more than half of those between 18-25 also said they will leave in the coming years, adversely impacting the local labor supply in the years ahead

The issues cited include lack of economic growth, lack of jobs, health insurance costs, declining business conditions, high S&L taxes, and a transportation system that cannot support the needs of its workforce.

Look at the key economic metrics, Connecticut vs. Massachusetts:

• Unemployment: CT at 5.6% in August 2016; MA at 3.9%; US at 4.9%
• Unemployed: CT up 5,500 over last year; MA down 30,300
• State Tax Revenue: CT up 0.8%; MA up 1.9%
• Single Family Housing Sales: CT up 9.9% year-to-date; MA up 14.2%

The Connecticut economy is expected to see growth of about 1%-1.5% in both 2016 and 2017, well below our long-term average annual growth rate of 2.5%.

Four recommendations for Connecticut:

1. To promote fiscal discipline, adopt a state spending cap tied to the CPI-U with accountability, adhere to the present spending cap laws on the books, which has been circumvented, and seek full accountability and visibility, making it known to the public when spending caps are exceeded.
2. Privatize where it makes sense.
3. Reconfigure wage and benefit packages for state and local workers to reflect what the private sector is paying.
4. Promote regionalism and the sharing of resources with the idea of increasing productivity.

If the region wishes to be competitive in a global marketplace that is increasingly competitive and subject to profound structural changes, then emphasis on the STEM skills- science, technology, engineering and math provides a gateway for growth.

STEM skills set the table for expansion in our manufacturing sector, which carries significant economic multipliers. It’s manufacturing which begets non-manufacturing, not the other way around. For every manufacturing job created, there are another 1.5 jobs created elsewhere in the local economy.

_______________________________________

Don Klepper Smith is Chief Economist & Director of Research at DataCore Partners LLC and Economic Advisor to Farmington Bank.  This is adapted from his presentation to the New England Knowledge Corridor Mayors’ Economic Forum on October 5, 2016. 

PERSPECTIVE commentaries by contributing writers appear each Sunday on Connecticut by the Numbers.