Data Collection Methods

Data collection methods were both qualitative (interviews, focus groups, organization survey, regional 211 call assistance data, Aging & Disability Resource Center data), and quantitative (US Census data). Data sources for this assessment include the US Census Bureau’s American Community Survey 2019 (ACS 2019), with estimates used whenever possible, as well as Community Commons maps, with data generally from the ACS 2019. Scoring was completed by awarding 5 points to the top need mentioned by a source, four points to the second need, three to the third, two to the fourth, and one to the fifth.

This study looked at poverty from two viewpoints, demographic (who is more likely to be in poverty), and geographic (locations of higher rates of poverty). When addressing poverty in the region, and in the three counties, the aggregate data for poverty do not differ much from Texas and US figures; however, when separated by age, race/ethnicity, education level, and family composition, a different picture of poverty in the region emerges. As in our previous needs assessment, in all three counties, children under 5 and children from 5-18 are the age categories most likely to live in poverty. In fact, data show that childhood poverty is prevalent in all three counties. Also in all three counties, residents of African American descent are more likely to live in poverty. The total numbers are not extremely high, but the percentage of poverty is much greater.

Education level is linked to poverty, with those having less than a high school diploma much more likely to be low income than those having higher levels of education.