UTAH’S NINTH ANNUAL REPORT
UTAH’SNINTH ANNUAL REPORTON INTERGENERATIONAL POVERTY, WELFARE DEPENDENCYAND THE USE OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 2020U TA H I N T E R G E N E R AT I O N A L W E L F A R E R E F O R M C O M M I S S I O N A N N U A L R E P O RT
2
CONTENTSAbout this Report. 4Executive Summary. . . 6Introduction. . . 8PART I: Status of Individuals Experiencing Intergenerational Poverty in 2019.11Child Well-Being. . 12Early Childhood Development. 12Education. 17Family Economic Stability. . 23Health . 29PART II: Leading in the Communities—Intergenerational Poverty Plan Implementation Pilot Program.32County IGP Plan Success Stories. 39PART III: Utah Intergenerational Welfare Reform Commission Report.43Conclusion . 56About the Data . 57Appendix A.1 Intergenerational Welfare Reform Commission Members. . .59Appendix A.2 Intergenerational Poverty Advisory Committee Members.59Appendix B.1 Commission Agency Studies. 60Appendix C.1 Schools Where 10% or More Students Experience Intergenerational Poverty.61Appendix C.2 Health Provider Shortage Areas. 66Appendix D.1 County Strategies to Reduce Intergenerational Poverty.67Endnotes. . . 703
ABOUT THIS REPORTThe Ninth Annual Report on Intergenerational Poverty, Welfare Dependency and Public Assistance provides theannual update on the progress of Utah’s Intergenerational Poverty Initiative (initiative), including a final report onthe state-funded Intergenerational Poverty Plan Implementation Pilot Program. This report continues to provide aroadmap for Utah across public, private, faith-based and community sectors to ensure Utah’s commitment to provide equitableopportunity to all of its residents through establishment of common goals as measured with the use of comprehensive data.This report is organized in three parts:PART I: Status of Individuals Experiencing Intergenerational Poverty in 2019Leading in the Communities—Findings from the IntergenerationalPART II: Poverty Plan Implementation Pilot ProgramIntergenerational Welfare Reform Commission report and Activities inPART III: the Past 12 monthsA supplemental report will be released by the end of calendar year 2020 as a continuation of the initiative’s efforts toanalyze the progress of families who were identified as experiencing intergenerational poverty when the initiative beganin 2012. The Eighth Annual Report, released in 2019, included an initial analysis of these families to evaluate the impactthe effort had on the outcomes for children when the initiative started, especially given the economic growth Utah hasexperienced since 2012.Although the COVID-19 pandemic has affected families in Utah, including those experiencing intergenerationalpoverty, the data contained in this report is from calendar year 2019. As a result, this Ninth Annual Report does notcapture the impacts of the pandemic on the well-being of children. Those impacts will be analyzed in the annual reportreleased in 2021.As in past reports, this report serves as an important supplement to the online data tools that are accessible to thepublic, which include the following: (1) county-level data; and (2) a statewide map identifying available resources incommunities with the highest rates of children experiencing intergenerational poverty.The previous eight annual reports are available to provide additional context and research for each of the areas of childwell-being.14
This report continues to provide a roadmap for Utah acrosspublic, private, faith-based and community sectors to ensureUtah’s commitment to providing equitable opportunity to allof its residents through establishment of common goals asmeasured with the use of comprehensive data.5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARYUtah continues to be recognized as a nationalleader in promoting the well-being of itschildren. In its 2020 KIDS COUNT Databook,the Annie E. Casey Foundation ranked the well-beingof Utah’s children fourth in the nation.2 This rankingrepresents significant progress for Utah’s children since2012, when Utah’s Intergenerational Poverty Initiativebegan. At that time, the state was ranked 11th nationwide.As the overall well-being of Utah’s children improves,so have indicators of well-being for Utah childrenexperiencing intergenerational poverty. More adults experiencing intergenerational povertyhave health insurance coverage and are utilizingthat insurance to treat diagnosed behavioral healthconditions. Counties with high rates of children experiencingintergenerational poverty implemented shortterm plans to reduce intergenerational poverty,and data reveals progress was made through theimplementation of innovative strategies in the24-month pilot program.Despite improvements in many areas contributing toachieving the Commission’s goals in the domains ofearly childhood development and education, challengesremain in family economic stability and health care.(See APPENDIX A.1—INTERGENERATIONALWELFARE REFORM COMMISSION MEMBERS.)The economic growth Utah has experienced throughout 2019continues to elude families remaining in intergenerationalpoverty with ongoing obstacles to self-sufficiency, includinglow levels of educational attainment among the adultpopulation, which is likely contributing to sporadicattachment to the labor force and low wages. The state’songoing focus on the implementation of long-term strategiesto improve job skills and increase educational attainment ratesamong those experiencing economic hardship will contributeto the Commission’s long-term goal of achieving economicstability for families experiencing intergenerational poverty.In 2019, the Intergenerational Welfare ReformCommission made progress towards its five- and 10-yeargoals with improvements on several important indicators: Despite an increase in the rate of adults experiencingintergenerational poverty, there were 1,066 fewerchildren experiencing intergenerational poverty andthe rate of children at risk of remaining in poverty asadults continued its decline to 21 percent. Kindergarten readiness increased slightly amongyoung children experiencing intergenerationalpoverty, as measured by the state’s kindergartenassessment. Significantly more children experiencingintergenerational poverty participated in enhancedkindergarten and growth in kindergarten was greaterfor these students than other students participatingin kindergarten.This report also builds on previous analyses of childrenexperiencing homelessness: Graduation rates among students experiencingintergenerational poverty increased, reducing thegap between the rates for these students and all Utahstudents. Few children experiencing intergenerational povertyare accessing homeless services but when theirfamilies do access services, they are largely focused onthe prevention of homelessness.6
these indicators will change in CY 2020 due to theCOVID-19 pandemic, the data contained in this reportprovides guidance to the Commission in those areas thatcontinue to strain child well-being, while also addressingemergent needs that have become readily apparentdue to the pandemic, such as educational equity. It ispossible that these impacts will require revision to theCommission’s five- and 10-year plan, Utah’s Plan for aStronger Future, upon analysis of the indicators in the 2021report. Students who are homeless have greater rates ofschool mobility and those who are homeless andexperiencing intergenerational poverty have evenhigher rates. Proficiency rates on academic assessments forchildren who are homeless are lower than childrenonly experiencing intergenerational poverty. Parents of children who are homeless and experiencingintergenerational poverty may suffer from behavioralhealth and physical health conditions.With eight years of data, across multiple governmentalsystems, Utah is able to see measurable progressthrough CY 2019 and the challenges thatremained for children through that year.Although it is expected that many ofAREASOF CHILD WELL-BEING LEADINGTO SUCCESS IN ADULTHOOD EDUCATIONUtah is able tosee measurableprogress throughCY 2019 and thechallenges thatremained forchildren throughthat year.FAMILYECONOMIC 5-Year Goal: Align systemsassisting w/educationaloutcomes to ensure effortsare focused in schoolsdisproportionately impactedby intergenerational poverty.These systems includeall levels of government,local schools, communities,businesses and non-profits.HEALTH 5-Year Goal: Children experiencing intergenerationalpoverty have access to qualityphysical, mental and dentalcare, regardless of wheretheir family resides in Utah.STABILITY 5-Year Goal: Childrenat risk of remaining inpoverty are living instable families, able tomeet their basic needs. 10-Year Goal: Childrenat risk of remaining inpoverty are living infamilies that are selfsufficient/reliant. 10-Year Goal: Children atrisk of remaining in poverty asthey become adults graduatefrom high school at a rateequal to the statewide rate. 10-Year Goal: Children experiencing intergenerationalpoverty are receiving physical,mental and dental care at thesame rates as the statewiderates in each of those areas,regardless of where theirfamily resides in Utah.EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT 5-Year Goal: Align all systemsinvolved in early childhooddevelopment to ensure Utah hasthe capacity to prepare childrenat risk of remaining in povertyfor kindergarten.7 10-Year Goal: Children at riskof remaining in poverty, as theybecome adults are emotionally,cognitively and developmentallyprepared for kindergarten.
INTRODUCTIONIn 2012, when the Intergenerational PovertyInitiative began, Utah’s economy was significantlydifferent than it was in 2019, the year evaluatedin this report. At that time, Utah was emerging fromthe Great Recession, unemployment was 5.4 percent,and the job growth rate was 3.3 percent. In 2019,prior to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Utah’seconomy was among the strongest in the nation with anunemployment rate of 2.6 percent.intergenerational poverty in 2012. Among thoseindividuals, there was a decrease of 24 percent amongthe adults experiencing intergenerational poverty and a42 percent decrease among the children between 2012and 2017.4The decrease in poverty, including intergenerationalpoverty, and continuing economic growth provides muchto celebrate. However, the resources needed for a familyto meet its basic needs grew between 2012 and 2019, andremains significantly greater than the amount identifiedby the federal poverty guidelines.The improvement in the economy between 2012 and 2019generated a significant decrease in the state’s poverty rate.In fact, Utah is recognized nationally as making dramaticprogress in reducing its child poverty rate, which is lowerthan the national child poverty rate.3In 2019, the federal poverty guideline amount for a familyof three, the average size intergenerational poverty family,was 21,330. This amount is insufficient to meet the basicneeds of a family this size, which is 63,253.5 The gapbetween these figures, approximately 41,923, is partiallyclosed through receipt of public assistance, but even thoseresources decrease the gap by only 20,207 per year.6The economic growth that took place between 2012and 2019 reduced unemployment and poverty rates inUtah and also appear to have contributed to the gainsmade by the individuals first identified as experiencingUtah Child Poverty Continues to DeclineFederal Poverty, 2007-2017Utah Poverty Continues to DeclineFederal Poverty, 2007–2019U.S. Children17%18%11%9.7%Utah 20152016201720182019
The ability to obtain employment that offers a wage to make up the remaining 20,593 is a challenge for families withinthe intergenerational poverty population, particularly given that these adults are sporadically attached to the laborforce and the majority lack an education beyond high school.The income gap and other factors analyzed throughout this report are limiting families’ ability to emerge from a multigenerational cycle of poverty. In 2019, there were 41,506 Utah adults living in this cycle.7 These adults represent 29percent of Utah’s adult population receiving public assistance. This rate has steadily increased even as the economy hasimproved over the past seven years.2019 Federal Poverty GuidelinesPersons in family/household2019 Federal PovertyGuideline1 12,4902 16,9103 21,3304 25,7505 30,1706 34,5907 39,0108 43,430Among Utah children between the ages of 0-17 years old, 5.7percent met the definition of intergenerational poverty in 2019.When including children receiving public assistance servicesfor at least 12 months but whose parents did not receive publicassistance for at least 12 months as children, that rate increasesto 21 percent of Utah’s child population. Both categories ofchildren, when combined, are considered at risk of remainingin poverty as adults, given that a child growing up in poverty ismore likely to remain poor in early and middle adulthood thanchildren who were never poor.8 Through the years of analysis,the number of children at risk has decreased by 22 percent.1,066 fewer children were identifiedas experiencing intergenerationalpoverty in 2019 compared to 2018.2019 Use of Public Assistance forIGP Families2019 Use of Work SupportProgram for IGP Families 3,894 4,790 11,522Supplemental NutritionAssistance Program(SNAP)Financial AssistanceChild Care Subsidies toSupport Employment,which increased by anaverage of 844 from 20189
Rate of Child at Riskof Remaining in Poverty as tional Poverty AdultsComprise Increasing Share ofPublic 018201720182019Utah Adults ReceivingPublic Assistance (PA) 201929%29%IGP adults(received PA as a child)2019Building on the progress made since the startof the Intergenerational Poverty Initiative,and the ongoing desire to meet its goals,members of the Intergenerational WelfareReform Commission have sufficient dataavailable to conduct richer analysis of thechildren and their parents in the seven yearssince the initiative began. As a result, eachof the Commission-member agencies areconducting longitudinal analysis to gaingreater understanding of the impact of publicresources utilized to improve outcomesfor these families, as well as improvedunderstanding of the population’s needs.These longitudinal studies will be released bythe end of CY 2020. (See APPENDIX B.1—COMMISSION AGENCY STUDIES.) Thesestudies are a continuation of the analysis thatwas discussed in the 2019 annual report.21%144,61052,795intergenerationalpoverty childrennon-IGP children receivingpublic assistance52,795144,610 IGP Children10197,405 Non-IGP Childrenreceiving Public AssistanceAt-Risk Children
This report evaluates progress toward achievingthe Commission’s five- and 10-year goals outlinedin Utah’s Plan for a Stronger Future: Five- and 10-YearPlan to Address Intergenerational Poverty.PART I: STATUSOF INDIVIDUALSEXPERIENCINGINTERGENERATIONALPOVERTY IN 2019through the evaluation of data indicators across thefour areas of child well-being that are the focus of theinitiative. The following reports these indicators forCY2019.The ability of state agencies to obtain additionalunderstanding of the families experiencingintergenerational poverty and of the counties to designplans to reduce intergenerational poverty starts with theIntergenerational Poverty Mitigation Act’s requirementthat all efforts be data-driven and research-based. Asnoted previously, between 2015 and 2019, the rate ofEach year, this report provides an opportunity toevaluate progress toward achieving the IntergenerationalWelfare Reform Commission’s five- and 10-year goalsoutlined in Utah’s Plan for a Stronger Future: Five- and 10Year Plan to Address Intergenerational Poverty.9 It does thisBaseline Data Update2018201953,86152,795Rate of Utah children experiencing intergenerational poverty6%5.7%Utah children at risk of remaining in poverty as adults23%21%39,48741,506Adults receiving public assistance, experiencing intergenerational poverty28%29%Children experiencing IGP living in single-parent households62%63%Young adults experiencing intergenerational poverty5,7035,506Children experiencing intergenerational povertyAdults experiencing intergenerational poverty11
children experiencing intergenerational poverty, aswell as the rate of children between the ages of 0 and17 years old at risk of remaining in poverty as adults,has decreased.10 The decline is greater among childrenat risk of remaining in poverty as adults than the rateof children experiencing intergenerational poverty,which has only decreased slightly during this time.This slight decrease is not entirely surprising given thatthe number of adults experiencing intergenerationalpoverty has increased in this same time period, makingit difficult to dramatically decrease the rate of childrenin the cycle of poverty.CHILD WELL-BEING While the overall rate of intergenerational poverty year-to-year doesnot change dramatically, the outcomes for those experiencingintergenerational poverty in some areas of child well-being have changed through the years as strategieshave been developed or modified and resources have been targeted to communities disproportionately impactedby intergenerational poverty. Since 2014, the domains of child well-being analyzed for this report remain earlychildhood development, education, family economic stability and health. The analysis across multiple domainsrecognizes the interrelated nature of these areas of well-being and the contribution each plays in disentanglingpoverty’s impact on limiting opportunity for children. Each area must be addressed in a comprehensive manner inorder to ensure these children are provided the opportunity to strive for success from their earliest years and intoand through adulthood.EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENTKey Indicators for Early Childhood Development—2019 Update20182019Children, IGP, ready for kindergarten, numeracy49%56%Children, IGP, ready for kindergarten, literacy32%35%Pregnant women, IGP, receive prenatal care89%92%Children, IGP, 0-2 years old, receive preventive health care78%79%Children, IGP, participate in public preschool30%27%Children, IGP, victim of substantiated case of abuse/neglect21%21%12
The Intergenerationa
progress in reducing its child poverty rate, which is lower than the national child poverty rate.3 of three, the average size intergenerational poverty family, The economic growth that took place between 2012 and 2019 reduced unemployment and poverty rates in Utah and also appear to have contributed to the gains
Larry A. Sagers Utah State University Regional Horticulturist Loralie Cox Utah State University Horticulturist, Utah County Adrian Hinton, Utah State University Horticulturist, Utah County Cooperators Linden Greenhalgh, Utah State University Extension Agent, Tooele County Utah State University Horticulture Agents Group
THIS HANDBOOK IS AVAILABLE AT dld.utah.gov UTAH DRIVER HANDBOOK 2020 v.1 . STATE OF UTAH UTAH DRIVER HANDBOOK AAMVA MODEL NON-COMMERCIAL This handbook is a collaborative effort between AAMVA and the Utah Driver License Division and contains the rules which should be followed when operating any vehicle on Utah roads.
Mr. Steve Burton, Utah Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers Mr. Will Carlson, Utah Prosecution Council Ms. Kim Cordova, Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice Mr. Mike Haddon, Utah Department of Corrections Ms. Jacey Skinner, Utah Judicial Council Mr. Dee Smith, Utah Office for Victims of Crime
2016 Crime in Utah Report Utah Department of Public Safety Bureau of Criminal Identification 4 2016 Crime in Utah Report Introduction This 2016 Crime in Utah report is published by the Utah Department of Public Safety's Bureau of Criminal Identification (BCI) to give governmental leaders and citizens a better
1. Online using Taxpayer Access Point at tap.utah.gov (Tax Commission only), 2. Online using the OneStop Online Business Registration at osbr.utah.gov (multiple Utah agencies), or 3. Submitting form TC-69, Utah State Business and Tax Registration (Tax Commission only). Get forms online at tax.utah.gov/forms. Federal Employer Identification Number
report, however, indicates that Utah's workforce is meeting the current overall demands imposed by Utah communities. Moreover, since 2009, Utah's Aggregate Demand Index number has dropped. y early 2014 Utah's index score was 2.8 - indicating the supply of pharmacists in Utah is meeting market demand.
THIS HANDBOOK IS AVAILABLE AT dld.utah.gov UTAH DRIVER HANDBOOK 2020 v.1 . STATE OF UTAH UTAH DRIVER HANDBOOK AAMVA MODEL NON-COMMERCIAL This handbook is a collaborative effort between AAMVA and the Utah Driver License Division and contains the rules which should be followed w
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Michael Styler, Executive Director UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Richard G. Allis, Director PUBLICATIONS contact Natural Resources Map & Bookstore 1594 W. North Temple Salt Lake City, UT 84114 telephone: 801-537-3320 toll-free: 1-888-UTAH MAP website: mapstore.utah.gov email: geostore@utah.gov UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY contact
