Mapping Opportunity for the Milwaukee Metro Area
Content
- Data and Methodology
- Calculation of Opportunity Index
- Example of calculating the Opportunity Index
- Data Definition and Sources
The Mapping Opportunity project uses 10 socioeconomic indicators classified under three dimensions of opportunity. The data are collected from the 2014-2018, 5-Year estimates of the U.S. Census’s American Community Survey (ACS). Data are at the census tract level for the Milwaukee Metro Area, which comprises Milwaukee, Waukesha, Ozaukee, and Washington counties.
Selection of indicators for this project was informed by current literature1 on opportunity mapping and a survey of existing practices of opportunity mapping employed by numerous municipalities and metropolitan regions across the US to assess opportunity in their respective jurisdictions. We relied heavily on opportunity metrics2 developed by the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity at Ohio State University in our selection of indicators. We include 10 socioeconomic indicators further classified under three broad themes of opportunity (see Table 1) and provide a rationale for our selection in the Data Definition and Sources section below.
Table 1: Dimensions, Indicators, and the observed values
| Dimension | Indicator | Highest Value | Lowest Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Economy | Employment/Population Ratio Median Household Income Employed in High Paying Jobs Poverty Rate1 | 0.88 $169,896 75.38% 78.36% | 0.34 $8,967 3.79% 0.86% |
| Education | High School or GED2 Bachelor’s degree or above Internet Access | 57.72% 87.25% 98.11% | 2.68% 0.45% 40.27% |
| Housing | Median House Value Homeownership Ratio Cost-Burden Households3 | $653,500 0.99 77.25% | $32,200 0 12.3% |
Note: 1, 2, 3Data for these indicators are reverse coded.
Footnotes
1 Sources that informed our research include the following:
Kirwan Institute’s report on Connecticut
Liu, C., Knaap, E., & Knaap, G. J. (2013, November). Opportunity mapping:
A conceptual analysis and application to the Baltimore metropolitan area.
In Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management Conference, Washington, DC.
2 Opportunity Metrics: Resource of Data and Research Kirwan Institute.
CALCULATION OF THE OPPORTUNITY INDEX
The analysis uses a rank-based method to compute the Opportunity Index. The calculation was completed in RStudio. Each value of an indicator was ranked based on its relative position in the data range. While the default ranking in R captures lower value with lower rank, for purposes of this project lower rank is associated with higher indicator value. Hence, most of the indicators are ranked in descending order to reflect lower rank associated with higher value, hence higher opportunity. Exceptions are three indicators where lower value is associated with lower rank that reflect higher opportunity.
Census tracts for the four county Milwaukee region were ranked 1 through 428 using scores on the indicators listed in Table 1 above, with 1 reflecting the highest value (very high opportunity) and 428 reflecting the lowest value (very low opportunity) for that indicator. Composite scores for each census tract were computed by aggregating the rank values for all 10 indicators. The aggregate rank values for each tract were further divided by 10 (i.e., the total number of indicators) to obtain the normalized rank sum (Opportunity Index). Tracts were then ranked 1 through 428 based on the normalized rank sum, with 1 reflecting the lowest sum (very high opportunity) and 428 reflecting the highest sum (very low opportunity).
Table 2: Group Classification, Rank, and associated Opportunity Categories
| Opportunity Categories | Group Classification | Rank | Number of Census Tracts |
|---|---|---|---|
| Very High Opportunity | 0-20% | 1-86 | 86 |
| High Opportunity | 20.1%-40% | 87-172 | 86 |
| Moderate Opportunity | 40.1%-60% | 173-258 | 86 |
| Low Opportunity | 60.1%-80% | 259-343 | 85 |
| Very Low Opportunity | 80.1% - 100% | 344- 428 | 85 |
Finally, in the Opportunity Index map, all census tracts are classified using a 20% group interval (see Table 2) where very high opportunity is color coded with the darkest shade of color and very low opportunity is coded with the lightest shade of color.
EXAMPLE OF CALCULATING THE OPPORTUNITY INDEX
To demonstrate, the table below describes the calculation for three census tracts in Milwaukee County.
Table 3: Comparison of Opportunity Index Calculation
| Indicators | Census Tract 803 | Census Tract 216 | Census Tract 12 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value | Rank | Value | Rank | Value | Rank | |
| Employment/Population Ratio Median Household Income Employed in High Paying Jobs Poverty Rate1 | 0.65 $142,644 74.20% 7.84% | 190 6 2 263 | 0.61 $49,286 24.43% 21.98% | 257 255 304 131 | 0.47 $26,517 12.38% 42.44% | 396 376 387 37 |
| High School or GED2 Bachelor’s degree or above Internet Access | 2.68% 87.25% 95.32% | 428 1 22 | 33.41% 13.70% 90.89% | 129 344 80 | 44.41% 6.36% 68.56% | 14 404 360 |
| Median House Value Homeownership Ratio Cost-Burden Households3 | $477,800 0.80 27.70% | 5 86 268 | $135,500 0.72 37.16% | 277 131 160 | $61,500 0.18 52.07% | 399 408 51 |
| Aggregate Rank Value Opportunity Index Value Rank by Opportunity Index value | 1271 127.10 3 | 2068 206.80 211 | 2832 283.20 390 |
|||
Note: 1, 2, 3Indicators are reverse coded. This means that a lower value corresponds to a higher opportunity. For all other indicators, a higher value corresponds to a lower rank and a higher opportunity.
After arranging all census tracts in descending order for Employment/Population Ratio
- Census Tract 803 records an indicator value of 0.646 (or 64.6%) and is ranked 190
- Census Tract 216 records an indicator value of 0.61 (or 61%) and is ranked 257
- Census Tract 12 records an indicator value of 0.47 (or 47%) and is ranked 396
Similarly, we then arrange all census tracts in descending order for Median Household Income
- Census Tract 803 records an indicator value of $142,644 and is ranked 6
- Census Tract 216 records an indicator value of $49,286 and is ranked 255
- Census Tract 12 records an indicator value of $26,517 and is ranked 376
We iterate this process until we have ranks for all indicators. Summing up the ranks, we get 1271, 2068 and 2832 as the Aggregate Rank Value for these three census tracts, respectively. Further, dividing the Aggregate Rank Value by 10, we get the Normalized Rank Sum for the Opportunity Index.
- Census Tract 803 records a normalized rank sum of 127.1 which corresponds to the 3rd rank position out of 428 census tracts for the Opportunity Index.
Since this rank falls within the lowest 20% group (1%-20% category) of all the census tracts, we categorize Census Tract 803 as a very high opportunity tract.
- Census Tract 216 records a normalized rank sum of 206.8 which corresponds to the 211th rank position out of 428 census tracts for the Opportunity Index.
Since this rank falls within the middle 20% group (40%-60% category) of all the census tracts, we categorize Census Tract 216 as moderate opportunity tract.
- Census Tract 12 records a normalized rank sum of 283.2 which corresponds to the 390th rank position out of 428 census tracts for the Opportunity Index.
Since this rank falls within the highest 20% (80%-100% category) of all the census tracts, we categorize Census Tract 12 as very low opportunity tract.
| Economic Indicators | |||
| Employment/Population Ratio | |||
| Definition: | Ratio of employed persons 16 years and over to total population 16 years and over. | ||
| Explanation: | Higher employment ratio indicates lower level of unemployment and better economic condition and hence is positively related to opportunity. A ratio value of .67 indicates that 67% of the total population over 16 years are employed. |
||
| Data Source: | ACS 2014-18, 5-Year Estimates, US Census. Table: S2301 | ||
| Median Household Income | |||
| Definition: | Median household income in a census tract. | ||
| Explanation: | Higher income is positively associated with better socio-economic status and is positively related to opportunity. | ||
| Data Source: | ACS 2014-18, 5-Year Estimates, US Census. Table: S1901 | ||
| Employed in High Paying Jobs | |||
| Definition: | Percent of civilian employed population 16 years and above in a high-paying job (>$50,000 annual earnings). | ||
| Explanation | Comparing the data on occupation by Median Earning (Census data Table B24021) for Milwaukee Metro Area as well as the US, the values are $51,058 and $50,078, respectively. By this measure (high paying jobs > $50,000 per year) the following are the classification of high paying jobs: Management, business, and financial occupations, Computer, engineering, and science occupations, Legal occupations, Educational instruction, and library occupations, Arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media occupations, Health diagnosing and treating practitioners and other technical occupations, and Law enforcement workers including supervisors. High-paying jobs allow for wealth accumulation and investment in future generations and are positively related to opportunity. |
||
| Data Source: | ACS2014-18, 5-Year Estimates, US Census. Table: S2401 | ||
| Poverty Rate | |||
| Definition: | Percentage of people have incomes below the U.S. official poverty threshold. | ||
| Explanation: | Poverty is associated with worse socioeconomic outcomes and is reverse coded here to be positively related to opportunity. | ||
| Data Source: | ACS 2014-18, 5-Year Estimates, US Census. Table: S1701 | ||
| Education Indicators | |||
| High School or GED | |||
| Definition: | Percentage of population 25 years and over for whom a high school diploma or equivalent (GED) is the highest level of educational attainment. | ||
| Explanation: | High school or GED as the highest educational attainment is negatively correlated with income other socio-economic indicators considered here and is reverse coded to be positively related to opportunity. | ||
| Data Source: | ACS 2014-18, 5-Year Estimates, US Census. Table: B15003 | ||
| Bachelor’s Degree and above | |||
| Definition: | Percentage of population 25 years and over for whom a bachelor’s degree or above is the highest level of educational attainment. | ||
| Explanation: | Higher level of education is positively correlated to income and other socio-economic indicators considered here and is positively related to opportunity. | ||
| Data Source: | ACS 2014-18, 5-Year Estimates, US Census. Table: B15003 | ||
| Internet Access | |||
| Definition: | Percentage of households with an internet subscription. | ||
| Explanation: | An internet subscription is a combination of dial-up, broadband, or cellular. A higher percentage indicates higher access to information and is positively related to opportunity. | ||
| Data Source: | ACS 2014-18, 5-Year Estimates, US Census. Table: S2801 | ||
| Housing Indicators | |||
| Median House Values | |||
| Definition: | Median value of owner-occupied housing units. | ||
| Explanation | Higher house value (as an asset or investment) indicates better locational advantages, quality services, better performing institutions, and income, and is positively related to opportunity. | ||
| Data Source: | ACS 2014-18, 5-Year Estimates, US Census. Table: DP04 | ||
| Homeownership Ratio | |||
| Definition: | Ratio of owner occupied to total occupied housing unit. | ||
| Explanation: | Homeownership ratio is positively correlated with income, education, house value, among other indicators and is positively related to opportunity. A ratio value of .75 indicates that 75% of all housing units being owner occupied. |
||
| Data Source: | ACS 2014-18, 5-Year Estimates, US Census. Table: DP04 | ||
| Cost Burdened Household | |||
| Definition: | Percentage of households [owner (with or without mortgage) or renter] that pay 30% or more of their income towards a mortgage or rent. | ||
| Explanation: | Cost-burden is positively correlated with lower income, low level of education and lower house value among other indicators and is reverse-coded to positively relate to opportunity. | ||
| Data Source: | ACS 2014-18, 5-Year Estimates, US Census. Table: DP04 | ||