A research partnership between the Indiana Latino...

A research partnership between the Indiana Latino Institute and the

Indiana University Public Policy Institute

i

Indiana Latino InstituteThe Indiana Latino Institute, Inc. (ILI), a 501(c)3 non-profit agency, is the only statewide organization of its kind committed to serving Latino commu-nities in the state of Indiana. ILI was established in 2001 as a statewide effort to aid Latino-serving organizations, at first committing much time, effortand energy specifically to health-related programming. However, over the years, ILI has grown to address many issues of importance to Latino com-munities, including a continued concentration on health issues and educational programming, support and assistance.

The Indiana Latino Institute strongly believes that local organizations best understand the specific needs of the communities they serve; therefore, ILItruly believe that Latinos can best be served by developing internal capacities at local levels throughout the state of Indiana, a strategy that ILI hasdeveloped and refined over the course of its existence. Since ILI’s inception in 2001, the programs and initiatives created and implemented in health,education and in other areas of importance to the Latino community have benefited Latinos throughout the state, with programming efforts concen-trating on over 10 counties throughout Indiana with the highest percentages of Latinos.

ILI’s mission is to improve health and advance education for the Indiana Latino community through statewide advocacy, research, andculturally responsive programs.

ILI’s vision is to be the source of authority and catalyst for change on all aspects of Health and Education that affect the Indiana LatinoCommunity.

The Indiana Latino Institute commissioned this study.

Indiana University Public Policy instituteThe IU Public Policy Institute delivers unbiased research and data-driven, objective, expert analysis to help public, private and nonprofit sectors makeimportant decisions that directly impact quality of life in Indiana. Using the knowledge and expertise of our staff and faculty, we provide research andanalysis that is free of political and ideological bias. A multidisciplinary institute within the Indiana University School of Public and EnvironmentalAffairs (SPEA), our efforts also support the Indiana Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (IACIR).

March 2016 • ISSUE 16-C35

© 2016 Indiana University Public Policy Institute School of Public and Environmental AffairsIndiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis334 N. Senate, Suite 300Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

CitationIndiana University Public Policy Institute. Indiana Latino Community Outreach Initiative: Indiana Latino Community Profile and Survey of Latino-servingOrganizations. Rachel Thelin, Dona Sapp. Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis, School of Public and EnvironmentalAffairs, March 2016.

ii

Community Member,

The Latino population is the largest and fastest growing minority population here in Indiana, as well as across the United States. Statewide, ourcommunity consists of 425,465 individuals of Latino descent (U.S. Census, 2014), and growth is expected to continue at a clear, consistent pace.As our population continues to expand and to directly impact areas throughout the state, it is imperative that we deepen our general understand-ing of the Latino community in Indiana.

Founded in 2001, the Indiana Latino Institute (ILI) is committed to serving Latinos and works to address issues of importance within our Latinocommunities. Our mission is to improve health and advance education for the Indiana Latino community through statewide advocacy,research, and culturally responsive programs.

Collectively, the Indiana Latino Community is diverse in many ways, including ethnic origin, age, educational attainment, immigration status andsocio-economic levels. Because of this intrinsic diversity, ILI, in partnership with the Indiana University Public Policy Institute (PPI), sought to cre-ate this Community Outreach Initiative to deepen our understanding for partnership with organizations currently involved in service provisionthroughout the state.

For Phase I of the Community Outreach Initiative, PPI worked directly with ILI to deepen our understanding of the needs and challenges facingthe Latino community and to identify potential opportunities for partnerships with service providing organizations throughout the state. Thisphase included the creation of a much-needed, detailed profile of the Indiana Latino population in terms of general population trends, education,economic and health indicators.

During Phase II of the Community Outreach Initiative, PPI partnered with ILI to design, administer, analyze, and report results of the IndianaLatino Community Survey. Throughout this phase, a more grassroots effort was used to help create a better understanding of the overlapping issuesand needs of Latinos statewide in the following areas: a) Education; b) Healthcare; c) Public Safety; d) Immigrant-specific; e) EconomicDevelopment; f) Community Relations; and g) Civic Engagement.

As the primary conveyor and disseminator of essential research and information on issues of importance to those we serve, we know we mustsuccessfully identify the core strengths and needs of our community. We must also work to create a network of statewide partnerships to buildcommunity assets that work to effectively address the needs of our growing Latino community as well as collaborate with research-driven partnersto create a truthful snapshot of our community.

The ILI Community Outreach Initiative truly provides a clear snapshot of the Indiana Latino Community and can be used not only to providedefinitive and necessary research, but also as a much needed tool to educate and connect statewide service providers, community leaders and offi-cials and other interested stakeholders.

As we strive to drive the agenda of Latino research statewide, we are grateful for our partnership with PPI, to the Lilly Endowment for theirencouragement and financial support of this necessary research, and to the organizations and community members who participated in data col-lection efforts. It is our hope that this important research be used to move our community forward and that the greater impact will ultimately helpimprove the quality of life for all Indiana Latinos.

Marlene Dotson

President & CEO

iv

Table of ContentsExecutive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .v

Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Indiana Latino Community Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1General Population Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Education Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Economic Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14Health Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Key Informant Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Survey of Organizations Serving the Indiana Latino Community . . . .24Survey Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24Overview of Respondent Organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25Programs and Service Provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Collaboration and Advocacy Related to Latino Issues . . . . . . . . . .33

Appendix A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

Appendix B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

Appendix C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58

AuthorsRACHEL THELIN, senior policy analyst,

Indiana University Public Policy Institute

DONA SAPP, senior policy analyst, Indiana University Public Policy Institute

v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe Indiana Latino Institute (ILI) was established in 2001 as a statewideeffort to aid Latino-serving organizations, initially focused on health-related programming. Over the years, ILI has expanded to address anumber of issues of importance to Latino communities, including a con-tinued concentration on health issues and educational programming,support and assistance. A primary component of ILI’s mission is devel-oping a coordinated effort to improve quality of life for the Latino com-munity in Indiana. In 2014, ILI entered into discussions with the IndianaUniversity Public Policy Institute (PPI) regarding a range of researchactivities that would assist ILI improve programming in the state.

This report provides a profile of the Latino community in Indiana, cover-ing overall demographic trends as well as education- and health-relateddata. A summary of key informant interviews among key stakeholdersidentified by ILI and conducted by PPI researchers is also included.Finally, results of the Survey of Organizations Serving the Indiana LatinoCommunity are presented.

PPI conducted an assessment of range of publicly available secondarydata on Latinos in the state. Selected highlights of the analyses of Latinopopulation trends, education, and health indicators, are included below:

• Since 1990, the Latino portion of the Indiana population morethan tripled, rising from 1.8 percent of the total population to 6.4percent in 2014. According to the U.S. Census Bureau and theAmerican Community Survey (ACS), in 2014 there were 425,465Latinos in Indiana, representing a 98 percent increase since 2000when Latinos represented 3.5 percent (214, 536) of the state’s totalpopulation.

• In 1990, the Indiana Latino population was concentrated in thenorthern region of the state, in particular the northwest. Accordingto the ACS, during the 2010-14 period (5-year estimates), most ofthe counties with the greatest concentration of Latino residentscontinue to be found in northern Indiana. However, areas withgreater change and increase in Latino population tend to be in thecentral and southern regions of the state.

• Indianapolis has the largest number of Latinos (80,273) that repre-sent 9.6 percent of the city population. Municipalities with a Latinopopulation that represent one-quarter or more of the total munici-pal population include areas in Lake County—East Chicago (50percent Latino), Hammond (36 percent), and Lake Station (29percent); and Goshen (28 percent), Plymouth (27 percent), andFrankfort (26 percent).

• In Indiana, Latinos represent the youngest population group. Themedian age of Latinos is 24.4 years old, compared to 31.3 forAfrican Americans and 40.2 for non-Hispanic whites. Fifty-onepercent of the Latino population in Indiana during the 2010-14period was 24 years or younger, compared to 32 percent of thewhite, non-Hispanic population

• In terms of educational attainment, 37 percent of Latinos inIndiana 25 years and older have not completed high school or an

equivalent level of education, a rate three times higher than non-Hispanic whites (11 percent). Fewer than 15 percent of Latinosadults in Indiana have a college or professional degree.

• Since 2006, Hispanic student enrollment in Indiana K-12 publicschools has risen from 59,869 (5.8 percent of total public schoolenrollment) to 106,048 in 2014 (10.2 percent of total public schoolenrollment).

• Based on ACS estimates, 15 percent of all Indiana residents wereliving below the poverty level during 2010-14. Nearly 30 percent ofHispanic or Latino residents (of any race) were living below thepoverty level, while less than 13 percent of white residents lived inpoverty.

• With regard to health-related indicators, 40 percent of 18-to-64year old Latinos in Indiana were insured in 2010-14. Latinos under18 and those between 18 and 64 years of age experienced higherrates of being uninsured than any other race or ethnic group inthese age categories. Five percent of Latinos 65 years of age andolder were uninsured compared to less than 1 percent of AfricanAmericans or whites in this age group. Only slightly more thanone-half of Latinos report having a personal physician or healthcare provider, the lowest rate among other population groups inIndiana—Asians (58 percent), African Americans (74 percent) andwhites (82 percent).

• In Indiana, during 2010-2014, the five leading causes of death wereheart disease, cancer, lung disease, stroke, and unintentionalinjuries. Among the Indiana Latino population, the five leadingcauses of death were cancer (60.6 per 100,000 population), heart dis-ease (55.6), unintentional injuries (25.2), stroke (16.1), and diabetes(14.3). Latinos were less likely to die from all five causes thanAfrican American or white adults in Indiana during this time period.

• In 2014, Latinos had a lower prevalence of select chronic condi-tions than other population groups—Latinos reported a lowerprevalence of asthma (13 percent), diabetes (8 percent), andhypertension (17 percent) than African Americans or whites.

• In 2014, 32 percent of Indiana adults were considered obese (i.e.,their body mass index or BMI was greater than or equal to 30.0).African Americans (43 percent) and Latinos (34 percent) reporteda higher prevalence of obesity than whites (32 percent) or Asians(9 percent). Approximately 30 percent of Latino adults in Indianareported no “leisure-time physical activity.”

In fall 2014 and spring 2015, PPI conducted key informant interviewsamong a group of stakeholders identified by ILI. These one-on-one inter-views enabled PPI researchers to gather perspectives of a diverse set ofindividuals from a variety of backgrounds including nonprofit organiza-tions, the faith-based community, higher education, as well as privateconsulting firms. The majority of key stakeholders conveyed that manyservice providers are unable to keep up with demand and often lackresources, such as bilingual/bicultural staff, to meet growing Latino com-munity needs. Many of those interviewed mentioned economic issues

vi

such poverty within the Latino community and how this impacts educa-tion, health, and well-being. Issues that impact economic mobility includedocumentation issues (obtaining a driver’s licenses) as well as access tocapital for business creation were also discussed. Education needs andbarriers were a primary concern, including access to quality education atall levels. Key informants highlighted obstacles that Indiana Latino resi-dents regularly confront in terms of education, including access to highereducation and barriers to financial aid. A common theme throughout theinterviews was collaboration and how such efforts and partnerships areeffective means of meeting the needs and challenges facing the IndianaLatino community. The majority of key informants cited benefits of col-laboration, such as the financial, programmatic, and administrative advan-tages and increased capacity to ramp up services.

PPI researchers designed and administered the Survey of OrganizationsServing the Indiana Latino Community online between March and May2015. The primary goal of the survey was to gather the perspectives oforganizations and individuals throughout the state that are involved inproviding services to members of the Latino community. The survey cov-ered a range of topics of importance to the Latino community in Indiana,including 1) critical needs of the Latino community, 2) the scope andquality of available programs and services, 3) changes in demand for andgaps in service provision, and 4) collaboration among organizations serv-ing Latinos in the state. Selected highlights from the survey resultsinclude the following:

• Thirty-nine percent of the total 129 respondents identified theirorganizations as a local or community-based nonprofit, and 19percent identified their organizations as an educational institution(PreK-12 school or college/university). Faith-based organizationsaccounted for 16 percent of total survey respondents, and smallerportions of respondent organizations were government agencies(local, state, or national), national nonprofits, and healthcareproviders at 7 percent, 5 percent, and 3 percent, respectively.

• Twenty-one (21) percent of respondent organizations reportedthat they primarily serve the Latino community, and 7 percentreported that they serve the Latino community exclusively. Themajority of respondents (72 percent) indicated their organizationsserve the Latino community, but not primarily or exclusively.

• Most respondent organizations reported a multi-faceted approachto providing services to the community. Thirty-five percent ofrespondent organizations reported providing programs and servic-es that support community improvement and capacity building.

• Survey participants were asked to identify up to five critical needsof the Latino community. One-third of survey respondents iden-tified access to affordable healthcare (insurance, Medicaid eligibil-ity) as one of the most critical needs. A positive relationship withlaw enforcement (willingness to report crimes/cooperate withpolice, Spanish-speaking officers) and bilingual services (e.g.,translation of written materials, bilingual staff, qualified inter-preters, and translators) were identified by 29 percent of respon-dents as most critical needs.

• The vast majority of survey respondents conveyed that there is agap between Latino community needs and available resources orservice (90 percent). Overall, some of the critical needs were iden-tified as areas where respondents see gaps. One-half or more ofrespondents identified positive relationship with law enforcement(57 percent); bilingual services (55 percent); and access to afford-able healthcare (50 percent) as areas where a gap exists in meetingcritical needs.

• The majority (83 percent) of respondents indicated a need forbilingual service provision to meet Latino community needs intheir area. Three-quarters of respondents reported their organiza-tion provides bilingual staff, including qualified interpreters andtranslators, to Latino clients if needed, and 85 percent indicatedtheir organization provides translated written and/or electronicmaterials to Latino clients if needed.

• Survey respondents were asked about changing demand for serv-ices or programs for the Latino or overall community over the lastthree years. Roughly 70 percent of survey respondents indicatedthat demand for services or programs had increased significantly(by more than 25 percent) or slightly (10 – 25 percent) both forthose that serve the Latino and overall community.

• When asked if, in the last three years, they have been able to fullymeet demand for service or programs among Latino clients, morethan one-half (56 percent) of respondents reported they were notable to fully meet demand for services or programs among Latinoclients.

• Survey participants were asked to report on whether their organi-zation was involved with other organizations/agencies in collabo-rations and/or networks for the purpose of providing services tomembers of the Latino community. The majority of respondentsindicated their organizations are involved in informal networks,including cooperation, coordination, or generally working togeth-er, with other organizations. Roughly 40 percent are involved informal collaborations, such as a legal, fiscal, or programmaticexchanges, with other organizations.

• Survey respondents were asked about advocacy and political activ-ities related to Latino issues. Most respondents (60 percent)reported that their organization supports or is directly linked to anorganization that seeks to promote positions relevant to Latinos.

The results of the breadth of research conducted by PPI and included inthis report will help ILI deepen its understanding of the Latino commu-nity in Indiana as well as identify potential opportunities for partnershipwith organizations currently involved in service provision throughoutthe state.

1

BACKGROUNDA primary component of the Indiana Latino Institute’s (ILI) mission isdeveloping a coordinated effort to improve the quality of life for theLatino community in Indiana. In 2014, the Indiana University PublicPolicy Institute (PPI) entered into discussions with ILI regarding a rangeof research activities that would assist ILI as they improve programmingin Indiana. The results of research conducted by PPI, including criticaldata collection and analytical tasks, will help ILI deepen its understand-ing of the Latino community in Indiana and in identifying potentialopportunities for partnership with organizations currently involved inservice provision throughout the state.

In fall 2014 and early winter 2015, PPI researchers conducted the firstimportant task of the assessment, a set of key informant interviews withnine individuals identified by ILI from a variety of backgrounds in non-profit organizations, faith-based organizations, and higher education.Key informants identified a range of needs in the Latino community,types of programs available as well gaps in services, and the importanceof collaborative efforts and partnerships as effective means of meetingthe needs and challenges facing the Indiana Latino community.

The next step of the assessment focused on analysis of publically avail-able secondary data on Latinos in the state. During this phase, PPIresearchers conducted an assessment of numerous aspects of the Latinoprofile in Indiana, including overall demographic trends and education-and health-related indicators.

Data SourcesThe data in this publication come from the following sources:

• U.S. Census Bureau

o 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2010 Census of Population and Housing

o American Community Survey (ACS)—5-year estimates from2005-2009 and 2010-2014 and 1-year estimates from 2014.

• Indiana Department of Education

o 2014 statewide enrollment data

o 2014 Disaggregated ISTEP+ Statewide Results

• United States Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS)

o Indiana Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System(BRFSS), 2014

o Multiple Cause of Death 1999-2014

o Division of Vital Statistics, Natality public-use data 2007-2014

• Indiana University Public Policy Institute, Survey of OrganizationsServing the Indiana Latino Community, 2015

The final step in the assessment process was administration of theSurvey of Organizations Serving the Indiana Latino Community (surveyof organizations). The survey covered a range of topics of importance tothe Latino community in Indiana, including 1) critical needs of the Latinocommunity, 2) the scope and quality of available programs and services,3) changes in demand for and gaps in service provision, and 4) collabora-tion among organizations serving the Latino community in the state.

This report summarizes findings from the key informant interviews,analysis of secondary data, and results of the survey of organizations. Thereport includes the following:

• A profile of the Latino population in Indiana

• A summary of key informant interviews

• Results of the survey of organizations, including an inventory anddescription of the type and scope of services provided and percep-tions of Latino community needs and challenges

INDIANA LATINO COMMUNITY PROFILEGeneral Population TrendsIndiana’s Latino population has grown rapidly over the past twodecades. Since 1990, the Latino portion of the Indiana population morethan tripled, rising from 1.8 percent of the total population to 6.4 percentin 2014 (Figure 1). According to the U.S. Census Bureau and theAmerican Community Survey (ACS) 1-year estimates, in 2014, therewere 425,465 Latinos in Indiana, representing a 98 percent increase since2000 when Latinos represented 3.5 percent (214,536) of the state’s totalpopulation.

As shown in Figure 2, the U.S. Latino population has steadily grownfrom 6.5 percent of the total population in 1980 to 16.3 percent in 2010.Despite growth over the last 25 years, Latinos as a share of Indiana’stotal population remains well below the 2014 national rate of 17 percent(not shown in exhibit) and states average of 11 percent (Map 1).According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Indiana ranked 33rd in percentLatino (state rankings not shown). In 2014, with the exception of Illinois(17 percent) and Wisconsin (6 percent), other Midwest region states sur-rounding Indiana had a lower percentage Latino population—Michigan(5 percent), Ohio (3 percent), and Kentucky (3 percent). The overall U.S.Latino population is projected to rise to 24 percent of the national popu-lation by 2040. Indiana’s Latino population is projected to grow at aslower rate, but increase to 9 percent of the total state population by2040.

2

Figure 1. Number of Latino residents and Latinos as a pecentage of the Indiana population, 1980 - 2014

Source: U.S. Census Bureau 1980-2010 Decennial Censuses and 2014 American Community Survey (ACS) 1-year estimates

Note: According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the ACS question on Hispanic origin was revised in 2008 to make it consistent with the 2010Census Hispanic origin question. Any change, compared with Census 2000, may be due to demographic changes, questionnaire changes, dif-ferences in ACS population controls, and/or methodological differences in the population estimates. (http://www.census.gov/programs-sur-veys/acs/guidance/comparing-acs-data/2014.html)

Count of Hispanic/Latinos Hispanic/Latinos as a percentage of the Indiana population

Co

un

t o

f L

atin

os

500,000

400,000

300,000

200,000

100,000

0

7

5

3

1 1980 1990 2000 2010 2014

1.6

87,04798,788

214,536

389,707425,465

1.8

3.5

6.0

Figure 2. Latinos as a percent of total population in Indiana and the United States, actual (1980 - 2010) and projected (2020 - 2040)

Sources: U.S .Census Bureau 1980-2010 Decennial Censuses and Indiana Business Research Center

Note: According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the ACS question on Hispanic origin was revised in 2008 to make it consistent with the 2010 CensusHispanic origin question. Any change, compared with Census 2000, may be due to demographic changes, questionnaire changes, differences in ACSpopulation controls, and/or methodological differences in the population estimates. (http://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/guidance/comparing-acs-data/2014.html)

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0% 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040

6.5%

1.6% 1.8%

3.5%

6.0%6.9%

8.1%9.0%

12.5%

16.3%

19.0%

21.6%

24.1%

6.4

U.S. Indiana

9.0%

Percen

tage o

f total In

dian

a po

pu

lation

3

Map 1. U.S. Latino population by state, 2014 (as a percentage of total state population)

Sources: U.S .Census Bureau, 2014 American Community Survey (ACS) 1-year estimates

Table 1. Indiana population, by race and ethnicity, 2000 - 2014

Source: U.S .Census Bureau 2000 and 2010 Decennial Census; 2014 American Community Survey (ACS) 1-year estimates

Notes: 1) Other, not Hispanic includes persons reporting single races not listed separately and persons reporting more than one race.2) Latinos include people of any race who reported Hispanic/Latino ethnicity; all other groups include those who did not report Hispanic/Latino ethnicity.3) According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the ACS question on Hispanic origin was revised in 2008 to make it consistent with the 2010 Census Hispanic origin question. Any change, compared with Census 2000, may be due to demographic changes, questionnaire changes, differences in ACS population controls, and/or methodological differences in the population estimates. (http://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/guidance/comparing-acs-data/2014.html)

Race and ethnic groups 2000 Census 2010 Census 2014 ACS Change 2010 -2014 (count)

% change 2010 - 2014

Share of total population

growth 2010 - 2014

Total 6,080,485 6,490,621 6,596,855 106,234

Hispanic or Latino 214,536 389,550 425,465 35,915 9.2 33.8

Native born 63,223 252,191 290,877 na na na

Foreign born 151,313 137,359 134,588 na na na

White alone, not Hispanic 5,219,373 5,289,807 5,293,743 3,936 0.1 3.7

Black or African American alone, not Hispanic 505,462 578,506 605,194 26,688 4.6 25.1

Asian alone, not Hispanic 58,424 101,907 129,562 27,655 27.1 26.0

Other, not Hispanic 82,690 130,851 142,891 12,040 9.2 11.3

% Hispanic or Latino 3.5% 6.0% 6.4%

% Latino native born 29.5% 64.7% 68.4%

% of Latino foreign born 70.5% 35.3% 31.6%

% White alone, not Hispanic 85.8% 81.5% 80.2%

% Black or African American alone, not Hispanic 8.3% 8.9% 9.2%

% Asian alone, not Hispanic 1.0% 1.6% 2.0%

% Other, not Hispanic 1.4% 2.0% 2.2%

1.3 - 4.7

4.8 - 9.0

9.1 - 13.5

13.6 - 47.7

Median = 9.0Mean = 11.3

% Latino

In Indiana, Latinos contribute topopulation growth and demo-graphic change. Between 2010and 2014, Latinos experiencedthe largest absolute populationgrowth (35,915) of all racial orethnic groups, followed by anincrease in the Asian populationof 37,655 (Table 1). The non-Hispanic white population grewslowly over the 2010 to 2014time frame, but still representedover three-quarters (80 percent)of the state’s total population in2014. With the exception of theAsian population, other groupsin Indiana represent slowergrowth rates than Latinos. Theonly group to decline as a pro-portion of the overall populationin Indiana according to Censusdata was white, non-Hispanic.As a share of total populationgrowth between 2010 and 2014,Latinos accounted for 34 per-cent of the increase in Indiana’spopulation.

4

In 1990, as shown in Map 2, the Indiana Latino population was concen-trated in the northern region of the state, in particular the northwest.According to the ACS, during the 2010-14 period (5-year estimates),most of the counties with the greatest concentration of Latino residents

continue to be found in northern Indiana. Median percentage Latino pertotal county population went from 0.6 percent in 1990 to 1.2 percent in2000 to 2.5 percent in 2010-14. The average percentage Latino rose from0.9 percent in 1990 to 2.0 percent in 2000 to 3.6 percent in 2010-14. At

Map 2. Indiana Latino population by county, (as a percentage of total county population)

Sources: 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census Bureau; 2010-2014 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates

0.0 - 1.4

1.5 - 2.4

2.5 - 4.4

4.4 - 17.4

2010-14Median % Latino = 2.5 Mean % Latino = 3.6

1990Median = 0.6 Mean = 0.9

2000Median = 1.2 Mean = 2.0

% Latino

At or below median for % Latino

At or above median % Latino

5

Table 2. Latino population by Indiana county, 2005-09 and 2010-14

CountyTotal

population,2005-09

Latino population,

2005-09

% Latino, 2005-09

% of IndianaLatinos in

county, 2005-09

Total population,

2010-14

Latino population,

2010-14

% Latino, 2010-14


county, 2010-14

Indiana total 6,342,469 321,320 5.1 na 6,542,411 411,536 6.3 na

Adams 33,955 1,193 3.5 0.4 34,533 1,477 4.3 0.4

Allen 348,646 20,625 5.9 6.4 360,990 24,650 6.8 6.0

Bartholomew 74,681 3,080 4.1 1.0 78,628 4,917 6.3 1.2

Benton 8,723 367 4.2 0.1 8,810 459 5.2 0.1

Blackford 13,254 124 0.9 0.0 12,576 164 1.3 0.0

Boone 53,931 1,027 1.9 0.3 59,246 1,449 2.4 0.4

Brown 14,724 190 1.3 0.1 15,074 212 1.4 0.1

Carroll 19,863 806 4.1 0.3 20,068 783 3.9 0.2

Cass 39,263 4,256 10.8 1.3 38,730 5,126 13.2 1.2

Clark 105,280 3,164 3.0 1.0 112,212 5,590 5.0 1.4

Clay 26,682 262 1.0 0.1 26,797 337 1.3 0.1

Clinton 34,081 4,553 13.4 1.4 32,987 4,644 14.1 1.1

Crawford 10,795 40 0.4 0.0 10,646 150 1.4 0.0

Daviess 30,205 1,169 3.9 0.4 32,156 1,413 4.4 0.3

Dearborn 49,608 412 0.8 0.1 49,840 556 1.1 0.1

Decatur 25,066 258 1.0 0.1 26,112 465 1.8 0.1

DeKalb 41,759 923 2.2 0.3 42,321 1,077 2.5 0.3

Delaware 115,548 1,655 1.4 0.5 117,441 2,313 2.0 0.6

Dubois 41,207 2,139 5.2 0.7 42,170 2,664 6.3 0.6

Elkhart 197,851 27,687 14.0 8.6 199,544 29,150 14.6 7.1

Fayette 24,313 199 0.8 0.1 23,955 234 1.0 0.1

Floyd 73,031 1,317 1.8 0.4 75,431 2,110 2.8 0.5

Fountain 17,075 302 1.8 0.1 17,002 402 2.4 0.1

Franklin 23,074 166 0.7 0.1 22,980 236 1.0 0.1

Fulton 20,251 717 3.5 0.2 20,638 961 4.7 0.2

Gibson 32,834 320 1.0 0.1 33,586 493 1.5 0.1

Grant 69,203 2,018 2.9 0.6 69,313 2,657 3.8 0.6

Greene 32,715 357 1.1 0.1 32,978 374 1.1 0.1

Hamilton 261,328 7,522 2.9 2.3 289,722 10,499 3.6 2.6

Hancock 65,777 966 1.5 0.3 70,851 1,343 1.9 0.3

Harrison 36,973 355 1.0 0.1 39,216 646 1.6 0.2

Hendricks 133,949 2,994 2.2 0.9 150,977 4,960 3.3 1.2

Henry 47,481 473 1.0 0.1 49,227 762 1.5 0.2

Howard 83,685 1,849 2.2 0.6 82,914 2,400 2.9 0.6

Huntington 37,890 472 1.2 0.1 36,959 703 1.9 0.2

Jackson 42,131 2,217 5.3 0.7 43,127 2,600 6.0 0.6

Jasper 32,197 1,293 4.0 0.4 33,443 1,893 5.7 0.5

Jay 21,270 619 2.9 0.2 21,279 614 2.9 0.1

Jefferson 32,628 495 1.5 0.2 32,447 773 2.4 0.2

Jennings 28,052 413 1.5 0.1 28,223 623 2.2 0.2

Johnson 136,081 3,016 2.2 0.9 143,789 4,716 3.3 1.1

Knox 37,970 424 1.1 0.1 38,181 660 1.7 0.2

Kosciusko 76,096 5,269 6.9 1.6 77,790 5,958 7.7 1.4

LaGrange 36,857 1,377 3.7 0.4 37,759 1,420 3.8 0.3

Lake 491,203 71,324 14.5 22.2 493,140 85,807 17.4 20.9

LaPorte 110,102 4,839 4.4 1.5 111,293 6,421 5.8 1.6

(continued on next page)

6

Table 2. (continued)

CountyTotal

population,2005-09

Latino population,

2005-09

% Latino, 2005-09


county, 2005-09

Total population,

2010-14

Latino population,

2010-14

% Latino, 2010-14


county, 2010-14

Lawrence 45,891 494 1.1 0.2 45,970 655 1.4 0.2

Madison 131,015 3,058 2.3 1.0 130,688 4,487 3.4 1.1

Marion 878,881 61,402 7.0 19.1 919,336 88,171 9.6 21.4

Marshall 46,605 4,023 8.6 1.3 47,032 4,220 9.0 1.0

Martin 10,067 133 1.3 0.0 10,294 39 0.4 0.0

Miami 36,508 612 1.7 0.2 36,394 937 2.6 0.2

Monroe 127,855 2,918 2.3 0.9 141,101 4,446 3.2 1.1

Montgomery 37,828 1,290 3.4 0.4 38,183 1,728 4.5 0.4

Morgan 70,179 669 1.0 0.2 69,343 920 1.3 0.2

Newton 13,974 569 4.1 0.2 14,140 784 5.5 0.2

Noble 47,729 5,123 10.7 1.6 47,497 4,651 9.8 1.1

Ohio 5,871 78 1.3 0.0 6,073 28 0.5 0.0

Orange 19,536 190 1.0 0.1 19,756 230 1.2 0.1

Owen 22,371 226 1.0 0.1 21,321 233 1.1 0.1

Parke 17,094 154 0.9 0.0 17,200 224 1.3 0.1

Perry 18,872 202 1.1 0.1 19,452 224 1.2 0.1

Pike 12,496 107 0.9 0.0 12,733 9 0.1 0.0

Porter 160,073 10,775 6.7 3.4 165,819 14,929 9.0 3.6

Posey 26,244 399 1.5 0.1 25,641 261 1.0 0.1

Pulaski 13,739 269 2.0 0.1 13,130 352 2.7 0.1

Putnam 36,993 506 1.4 0.2 37,728 647 1.7 0.2

Randolph 25,914 514 2.0 0.2 25,801 808 3.1 0.2

Ripley 27,378 378 1.4 0.1 28,601 460 1.6 0.1

Rush 17,425 151 0.9 0.0 17,147 208 1.2 0.1

St. Joseph 266,400 16,508 6.2 5.1 266,916 20,628 7.7 5.0

Scott 23,646 296 1.3 0.1 23,897 393 1.6 0.1

Shelby 43,964 1,182 2.7 0.4 44,428 1,684 3.8 0.4

Spencer 20,167 472 2.3 0.1 20,893 545 2.6 0.1

Starke 23,398 669 2.9 0.2 23,215 793 3.4 0.2

Steuben 33,544 1,003 3.0 0.3 34,190 1,059 3.1 0.3

Sullivan 21,316 215 1.0 0.1 21,227 346 1.6 0.1

Switzerland 9,627 14 0.1 0.0 10,514 164 1.6 0.0

Tippecanoe 162,527 11,414 7.0 3.6 178,135 13,897 7.8 3.4

Tipton 16,055 278 1.7 0.1 15,688 388 2.5 0.1

Union 7,083 79 1.1 0.0 7,382 32 0.4 0.0

Vanderburgh 174,544 2,250 1.3 0.7 180,877 4,264 2.4 1.0

Vermillion 16,301 185 1.1 0.1 15,952 160 1.0 0.0

Vigo 105,434 1,625 1.5 0.5 108,264 2,635 2.4 0.6

Wabash 33,004 457 1.4 0.1 32,492 728 2.2 0.2

Warren 8,573 13 0.2 0.0 8,421 95 1.1 0.0

Warrick 57,065 673 1.2 0.2 60,538 1,007 1.7 0.2

Washington 27,780 281 1.0 0.1 28,017 358 1.3 0.1

Wayne 68,151 1,402 2.1 0.4 68,360 1,814 2.7 0.4

Wells 27,720 520 1.9 0.2 27,732 638 2.3 0.2

White 23,840 1,910 8.0 0.6 24,485 1,808 7.4 0.4

Whitley 32,504 391 1.2 0.1 33,307 588 1.8 0.1

Source: U.S. Census Bureau; 2005-2009 and 2010-2014 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates

7

the county level, in 2010-14, Latinos represent anywhere from 0 percent(Pike County) to 17 percent in Lake County of the total county popula-tion (Table 2). In Lake, Elkhart, Clinton, and Cass counties, more than 13percent of the population is Latino. These four are followed by Noble,Marion, Porter and Marshall counties (all over 9 percent).

Map 3 illustrates the percentage change in county-level Latino popula-tion between ACS 5-year estimate periods 2005-09 and 2010-14. Themean change was 48.6 percent increase in Latino population during this

period. Areas with greater change tend to be in the central and southernregions of the state. Warren, Crawford, Vanderburgh, Harrison, Decatur,and Clark counties experienced 75 percent or higher change in Latinopopulation between 2005-09 and 2010-14. While the number of Latinosin Switzerland County is relative small, the percent change in the Latinopopulation is dramatic. As shown in Table 2, the Latino population inSwitzerland County went from 14 in 2005-09 to 164 in 2010-14.A fewcounties experienced a decline in Latino population between 2005-09and 2010-14. Counties that experienced the largest percent change

Map 3. Percent change Indiana Latino population by county, comparison of 2005-09 and 2010-14 ACS 5-year estimates

Sources: U.S .Census Bureau, 2005-2009 and 2010-2014 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates

Mean %change = 48.6

Median %change = 32.6

% change Latino population

-91.6 - 17.3

17.4 - 32.6

32.7 - 49.6

49.7 - 1,071.4

At or below median for % change

At or above median % change

8

declines (negative 60 percentchange or greater) includePike, Martin, Ohio, andUnion.

Figure 3 shows the top 10counties by Latino populationduring the 2010-14 period.These counties account for 73percent of the total Latinopopulation in Indiana in 2010-14 and 74 percent of theLatino population during the2005-09 period. During boththe 2005-09 and 2010-14 peri-ods, Lake, Marion, andElkhart counties accounted for25 percent of the total Indianapopulation and 50 percent ofthe state’s Latino population.

Table 3 includes top 25Indiana municipalities byLatino population during the2010-14 period. Indianapolishas the largest number ofLatinos (80,273) that represent9.6 percent of the city popula-tion. Municipalities with aLatino population that repre-sent one-quarter or more ofthe total municipal populationinclude areas in LakeCounty—East Chicago (50percent Latino), Hammond(36 percent), and Lake Station(29 percent); and Goshen (28percent), Plymouth (27 per-cent), and Frankfort (26 per-cent).

Figure 3. Top 10 Indiana counties by Latino Population, 2010-14

Source: U.S. Census Bureau; 2010-2014 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates

Table 3. Top 25 Indiana municipalities by Latino population, 2010-14


Marion

Lake

Elkhart

Allen

St. Joseph

Porter

Tippecanoe

Hamilton

LaPorte

Kosciusko

Total county population,

2010-14

919,336

493,140

360,990

289,722

266,916

165,819

178,135

289,722

111,293

77,790

Municipality Total population, 2010-14 Latino population, 2010-14 % Latino, 2010-14

Indianapolis 835,097 80,273 9.6

Hammond 79,585 28,679 36.0

Fort Wayne 255,784 20,763 8.1

East Chicago 29,387 14,700 50.0

South Bend 100,422 12,679 12.6

Elkhart 51,539 12,241 23.8

Goshen 32,297 9,049 28.0

Lafayette 69,982 8,805 12.6

Portage 37,008 6,365 17.2

Lawrence 46,796 5,767 12.3

Merrillville 35,262 4,791 13.6

Gary 79,165 4,387 5.5

Frankfort 16,488 4,317 26.2

Logansport 17,933 4,242 23.7

Hobart 29,136 3,881 13.3

Evansville 120,220 3,738 3.1

Lake Station 12,369 3,636 29.4

Highland 23,429 3,562 15.2

Schererville 29,082 3,443 11.8

Bloomington 81,963 3,360 4.1

Carmel 83,474 2,954 3.5

Anderson 55,789 2,798 5.0

Mishawaka 48,120 2,781 5.8

Munster 23,325 2,740 11.7

Plymouth 10,048 2,696 26.8

88,171

85,807

29,150

24,650

20,628

14,929

13,897

10,499

6,421

5,958

9

About three-fourths of Latinos in Indiana are of Mexican origin followedby people from Central and South America and the Caribbean (Figure4). Latino’s with Puerto Rican origins represent 8 percent of IndianaLatinos. The balance of Indiana’s Latino population is diverse. Duringthe 2010-14 period, no country other than Mexico accounts for morethan 3 percent of Indiana’s total Latino population (Table 4). FollowingMexico, the leading origin countries are El Salvador, Honduras,Guatemala, and Cuba.

Based on ACS data for the 2010-14 period, two-thirds of IndianaLatinos are US-born. Among foreign-born (34 percent) Latinos, approx-imately 8 percent were naturalized US citizens (Figure 5). The PewHispanic Center estimates that Indiana has around 11,000 unauthorizedimmigrants (based on a 2009-2010 average) (Pew Hispanic Center,2011). This is about 1.8 percent of the total Latino population, lowerthan the nationwide rate of 3.7 percent.

In Indiana, Latinos represent the youngest population group. The medi-an age of Latinos is 24.4 years old, compared to 31.3 for AfricanAmericans and 40.2 for non-Hispanic whites (Table 5). Fifty-one percentof the Latino population in Indiana during the 2010-14 period was 24years or younger, compared to 32 percent of the white, non-Hispanicpopulation (Figure 6A). Twenty-eight percent of the white, non-Hispanic population is aged 55 years or older compared to only 9 percent of Latinos (Figure 6B).

Figure 4. Indiana Latino population by place of origin, 2010-14

Source: U.S. Census Bureau; 2010-2014 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-yearestimates

Table 4. Top 12 countries of origin for Indiana's Latino population,2010-14


Cuba orDominicanRepublic

1.9%

Figure 5. Citizenship of Indiana Latinos, 2010-14

Source: U.S. Census Bureau; 2010-2014 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-yearestimates

Foreign born: not a naturized

U.S. citizen,26.1%

Foreign born: naturized

U.S. citizen,7.6%

Nativeborn,66.3%

Mexico76.1%

South America3.1%

Other4.0%

CentralAmerica

6.8%

PuertoRico8.0%

Total 411,536 100.0%

Mexico 313,249 76.1%

El Salvador 9,266 2.3%

Honduras 7,737 1.9%

Guatemala 6,802 1.7%

Cuba 5,160 1.3%

Peru 3,266 0.8%

Dominican Republic 2,748 0.7%

Colombia 2,583 0.6%

Nicaragua 2,329 0.6%

Venezuela 1,832 0.4%

Ecuador 1,762 0.4%

Argentina 1,364 0.3%

Other 20,344 4.9%

Puerto Rico 33,094 8.0%

Table 5. Median age in years, by gender and ethnicity, Indiana,2010-14


Gender Total population

Hispanicor Latino White

Black orAfrican

AmericanAsian

Total 37.2 24.4 40.2 31.3 30.4

Male 35.9 25.0 38.9 29.6 28.9

Female 38.5 23.7 41.3 32.7 31.7

10

Figure 6A. Population share by age, Latino, Indiana, 2010-14


Figure 6B. Population share by age, white, non-Hispanic, Indiana, 2010-14

20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

85+

75 - 84

65 - 74

55 - 64

45 - 54

35 - 44

30 - 34

25 - 29

20 - 24

18 - 19

15 - 17

10 - 14

5 - 9

0 - 4

0.5%

1.3%

2.3%

5.4%

8.7%

14.0%

8.3%

7.4%

8.3%

3.5%

5.4%

11.1%

11.9%

12.0%

0.2%

0.9%

2.0%

5.0%

9.1%

14.9%

9.3%

8.5%

8.6%

3.6%

5.2%

9.9%

11.5%

11.3%

3%

5%

9%

14%

15%

12%

6%

6%

7%

3%

4%

6%

6%

5%

1.3%

4.1%

8.0%

13.5%

15.0%

12.8%

6.2%

6.2%

7.0%

2.8%

4.1%

6.6%

6.4%

5.9%

85+

75 - 84

65 - 74

55 - 64

45 - 54

35 - 44

30 - 34

25 - 29

20 - 24

18 - 19

15 - 17

10 - 14

5 - 9

0 - 4

Females Males

Females Males

Education IndicatorsFigure 7 shows the five-year average (2010-14) educational attainment inIndiana by race and ethnicity. Thirty-seven percent of Latinos in Indiana25 years and older had not completed high school or an equivalent levelof education, a rate three times higher than non-Hispanic whites (11 per-cent). About one-third had completed high school or an equivalent edu-cation. Fewer than 15 percent had a college or professional degree.

Since 2006, Hispanic student enrollment in Indiana K-12 public schoolshas risen from 59,869 (5.8 percent of total public school enrollment) to106,048 in 2014 (10.2 percent of total public school enrollment). More

than 5 percent of all Indiana public school students and 51 percent ofHispanic students were English Learner (EL) students in 2014. EnglishLearner (EL) or English Language Learner (ELL) refers to any student whomay or may not be in the English as a New Language (ENL) programbut those who are continuing to acquire the English language.

Figure 8 compares ISTEP+ results for Indiana public school students(grades 3 through 8) in 2014 by a variety of academic performance indi-cators including race/ethnicity, EL status, special education, andfree/reduced price meals. ISTEP+ results vary substantially by race andethnic group. Three-quarters of students taking the ISTEP+ were white,12 percent were black, 11 percent were Hispanic, and 2 percent were

Asian (Figure 8A). Among whitestudents taking ISTEP+, 80 per-cent received a passing score,while only 52 percent of black stu-dents and 64 percent of Hispanicstudents received a passing score.English learners represented only5 percent of total public schoolstudents taking the ISTEP+(Figure 8B). Less than 50 percentof EL students received a passingISTEP+ score in 2014, comparedto 76 percent of non-EL studentspassing the exam.

11

Figure 7. Educational attainment among Indiana adults (age 25 years and older), by race and ethnicity, 2010-14


100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Hispanic White Black or Asian or Latino African American

Bachelor’sdegree or higher

Some college or associate’sdegree

High schoolgraduate(includesequivalency)

Less than highschool diploma

12.3%

20.9%

29.6%

37.2%

15.7%

35.3%

33.5%

15.7%

24.4%

29.1%

35.9%

10.7%

57.6%

14.7%

14.9%

12.8%

12

Figure 8. Indiana ISTEP+ results (grades 3 through 8), by race and English learners, 2014

Source: Indiana Department of Education, 2014 Disaggregated ISTEP+ Statewide Results, extracted March 2015

Notes:1) Includes only students, grades 3 thru 8, taking the ISTEP+ exam in spring 2014.2) Racial categories exclude multiracial and American Indian.3) English Learner (EL) or English Language Learner (ELL) refers to any student who may or may not be in the ENL program but those who are continuing to acquire the English language.

Inner pie: Race/ethnic distribution of Indiana students taking ISTEP+Outer ring: percent ISTEP+, by race/ethnicity

Inner pie: English learner distribution of Indiana students taking ISTEP+Outer ring: percent passing ISTEP+, by English learner status

8A - by Race

8B - by English Learners (EL)

83%

47%

64%

52%

80% passedISTEP

Asian2%

Englishlearners

5%

Non-Englishlearners

95%

White76%

Hispanic11%

Black12%

76% passedISTEP

13

Map 4 illustrates the geographic distribution of Hispanic students, ELstudents, students receiving free/reduced price meals, and special educa-tion students by county and school corporation. Appendix A provides

similar information with the added detail of enrollment and school cor-poration rank by each indicator. Many school corporations located innorthern Indiana counties fall above the median across multiple indica-

Map 4. Indiana public school students as a percent of total enrollment, by school corporation, Hispanic origin, English learners, free and reduced pricemeals, and special education, 2014

Source: Indiana Department of Education 2014 enrollment data

0.2 - 1.9 3.5 - 8.0

2.0 - 3.4 8.1 - 61.1

English learner (EL) students(% of total enrollment)

Students receiving free/reducedprice meals (% of total enrollment)

Special education student(% of total enrollment)

Percent of Hispanic students

n = 102,280 Hispanic students (where school district boundary was available)

Median percent = 3.4

Mean percent = 7.0

14

tors. For example, a number ofschool corporations located in St.Joseph, Elkhart, Kosciusko, andNoble counties fall within the topquartile in Hispanic students as apercent of total enrollment, EL stu-dents as a percent of total enroll-ment, and percent of studentsreceiving free/reduced price meals.School corporations located in thesouthern Indiana counties ofJennings, Jefferson, Clark, Daviess,and Vanderburgh also have ratesabove the median for all economicindicators examined.

Economic Indic atorsAccording to the ACS, medianhousehold income in Indiana for2010-14 was $48,737 (in 2014inflation-adjusted dollars). Asshown in Figure 9, median house-hold income among Latinos inIndiana was $38,618 during thesame 2010-14 period. Based onACS estimates, 15 percent of allIndiana residents were livingbelow the poverty level during2010-14. Nearly 30 percent ofHispanic or Latino residents (ofany race) were living below thepoverty level, while less than 13percent of white residents lived inpoverty (Figure 10). Figure 11shows that language spoken athome is a strong indicator ofpoverty in Indiana. More than 92percent of Indiana residents spokeEnglish at home during the 2010-14 period, an estimated 14 percentof which lived in poverty. Nearly 5percent of Indiana residents spokeSpanish at home during this sametime period, an estimated 29 per-cent of which lived in poverty.

Figure 9. Median household income in the past 12 months (in 2014 inflation-adjusted dollars), by race and ethnicity, 2010-14


$60,000

$50,000

$40,000

$30,000

$20,000

$10,000

$0 Hispanic White Black or Asian or Latino African American

Indiana medianhousehold income = $48,737

$38,618

$51,623

$30,531

$52,818

Figure 10. Indiana poverty rates, by race and ethnicity, 2010-14


Notes: 1) Hispanic or Latino origin can apply to any race and, therefore, is not mutually exclusive.2) Poverty statistics presented in ACS reports and tables adhere to the standards specified by the Office of Management and Budget in Statistical Policy Directive 14. The Census Bureau uses a set of dollar value thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is in poverty. Further, poverty thresholds for people living alone or with nonrelatives (unrelated individuals) and two-person families vary by age (under 65 years or 65 years and older). If a family’s total income is less than the dollar value of the appropriate threshold, then that family and every individual in it are considered to be in poverty. Similarly, if an unrelated individual’s total income is less than the appropriate threshold, then that individual is considered to be in poverty. The poverty thresholds do not vary geographically. They are updated annually to allow for changes in the cost of living (inflation factor) using the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

Individuals living below poverty level, by race and Hispanic or Latino origin

White12.8%

Black32.2%

Asian21.3%

Hispanic orLatino origin(of any race)

29.5%

Indiana poverty rate = 15.5%

15

Maps 5 and 6 compare economic indicators (including poverty rates andfood stamp recipients,) between the general poverty in Indiana and thepoverty rate among Latino residents. Map 5 shows the estimated mediancounty poverty rate for all Indiana residents between 2010 and 2014 was13.9 percent. Many counties with higher poverty rates (above the median)were clustered in the eastern and northern areas of the state. Hamilton(4.8) and Hendricks (5.8) counties located in central Indiana had the lowestpoverty rates, while Monroe (24.9), Delaware (22.6), Tippecanoe (22.2) andWayne (21.1) had the highest rates during this time period.

When looking at poverty rates among residents of Hispanic or Latinoorigin, the median county poverty rate for the Hispanic/Latino popula-tion was 27 percent (Map 5). Very few counties had Hispanic/Latinopoverty rates that fell below the overall median poverty rate of 13.9 per-cent. While a number of counties had Hispanic/Latino poverty rates thatwere above the overall median rate but below the Hispanic/Latino rate(between 14.0 and 27.0 percent), half of all Indiana counties haveHispanic/Latino poverty rates at or above 27 percent.

Map 6 shows the estimated median county percent of all Indiana resi-dents receiving food stamps between 2010 and 2014 was 11.8 percent.Counties with higher food stamp recipient rates (above the median) weredistributed widely across the state. Hamilton County (3.8) had the lowestpercent of food stamp recipients, while Fayette County (20.8) had thehighest percent of food stamp recipients during this time period.

When looking at food stamp recipients among residents of Hispanic orLatino origin, the median county percent of food stamp recipients for theHispanic/Latino population was 15.9 percent (Map 6). Very few countieshad Hispanic/Latino poverty rates that fell below the overall medianpoverty rate of 13.9 percent. While many Indiana counties hadHispanic/Latino food stamp recipient rates that were below the overallmedian rate of 11.8 percent, half of all Indiana counties haveHispanic/Latino food recipient rates at or above 15.9 percent.

Figure 11. Indiana population living below poverty, by language spoken at home, 2010-14

29% 13%26% Asian and Pacific Island

1.1%

14% below poverty

Other Indo-European 2.2%

Spanish4.6%

Only English92.1%

Inner pie: Distribution of Indiana residents by language spoken at homeOuter ring: percent below poverty, by language spoken


Note:Excludes language spoken at home reported as Other.

16

Map 5. Indiana poverty rate, by Hispanic or Latino origin and county, 2010-14

Sources: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS), 2010-2014

Indiana poverty rate (general population)

Indiana poverty rate (Hispanic/Latino population)

Median county poverty rate(general population) = 13.9

Percent of county populationliving below poverty level

4.8 - 11.4

11.5 - 13.8

13.9 - 16.7

16.8 - 24.9

Median county poverty rate(Hispanic/Latino population) = 27.1

Counties below state median

Counties at or above the state median (13.9 - 27.0)

Counties at or above the Hispanic/Latino median

(27.1 or higher)

17

Map 6. Indiana food stamp recipients as a percent of population, by Hispanic or Latino origin and county, 2010-14

Sources: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS), 2010-2014

% food stamp recipients (general population)

% food stamp recipients (Hispanic/Latino population)

Median county percent food stamprecipients (general population) = 11.8

Percent of county populationreceiving food stampes

3.8 - 9.4

9.5 - 11.7

11.8 - 14.1

14.2 - 20.8

Median county percent food stamprecipients (Hispanic/Latino population) = 15.9

Counties below state median

Counties at or above the state median (11.8 - 15.9)

Counties at or above the Hispanic/Latino median

(16.0 or higher)

18

According to ACS data, 22 percent ofchildren in Indiana lived in poverty in2010-14. As shown in Figure 12,poverty was more prevalent amongAfrican American (45 percent) andLatino (38 percent) children. Thesegroups experienced more than twicethe poverty rate of white (16 percent)children during this period.

In 2010-14, over one-half of Latinos inIndiana were clustered in production,transportation, and material moving(28 percent) or service (26 percent)occupations (Figure 13). Latinos wereless likely than other populationgroups to work in management andprofessional and related occupations(17 percent) and more likely to work innatural resources, construction, andmaintenance occupations (12 percent)during this period.

Figure 12. Percent of children (0 to 17 years) in poverty in Indiana, by race and ethnicity, 2010-14


50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Hispanic Black or Asian White or Latino African American

% of Indiana children inpoverty = 22.1%

37.9%

Figure 13. Indiana occupational groups, by race and ethnicity, 2010-14


100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Hispanic Black or White Asian or Latino African American

Management, professional, and relatedoccupations

Sales and office occupations

Natural resources construction and maintenance occupations

Service occupations

Production, transportation, and materialmoving occupations

17.2%

17.0%

12.4%

25.7%

27.7%

25.0%

25.0%

4.2%

25.3%

20.5%

33.4%

24.1%

9.1%

15.8%

17.6%

52.9%

16.1%

2.0%

16.3%

12.7%

45.1%

20.5%

16.1%

19

As shown in Figure 14, the unem-ployment rate in Indiana was 8.8during 2010-14. The unemploy-ment rate among Latinos was esti-mated at 7.7, compared to 5.0 forwhites. African Americans had thehighest unemployment rate (11.1),while Asians had the lowest unem-ployment rate (3.8).

Health IndicatorsDuring 2010-14, 14 percent ofHoosiers did not have health insur-ance. According to ACS data, non-elderly adult Hoosiers aged 18 to 64in each race and ethnic group hadthe highest rates of being unin-sured, followed by children andyouth under 18 years of age, andadults over 65 (Figure 15). AmongLatinos in Indiana, 40 percent of18-to-64 year olds were insured in2010-14. Latinos under 18 andthose between 18 and 64 years ofage experienced higher rates ofbeing uninsured than any otherrace or ethnic group in these agecategories. Five percent of Latinos65 years of age and older wereuninsured compared to less than 1percent of African Americans orwhites in this age group.

According the 2014 IndianaBehavioral Risk Factor SurveillanceSystem (BRFSS), 80 percent ofadults in Indiana reported having apersonal physician or health careprovider. Only slightly more thanone-half of Latinos report having apersonal physician or health careprovider, the lowest rate amongother population groups inIndiana—Asians (58 percent),African Americans (74 percent) andwhites (82 percent) (Figure 16).

Figure 15. Proportion of Indiana population uninsured (health insurance), by age group, race and ethnicity, 2010-14


Hispanic or Latino

Black or AfricanAmerian

Asian

White

65+

18-64

<18

5.0%

Figure 16. Proportion of Indiana adults that report having a primary physician or health care provider, by raceand ethnicity, 2014

Source: Indiana Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), 2014

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

51.3%57.5%

74.1% 82.1%

40.4%

13.0%

0.8%26.3%

5.8%

7.7%

19.4%

10.4%

0.3%

16.4%

7.9%

Hispanic Asian Black or White or Latino African American

Figure 14. Unemployment rate for Indiana population 16 years and over, by race and ethnicity, 2010-14


12

10

8

6

4

2

0 Hispanic White Black or Asian or Latino African American

Indiana unemploymentrate = 8.8

7.7

5.0

11.1

3.8

20

In Indiana, during 2010-2014, the five leading causes of death were heartdisease, cancer, lung disease, stroke, and unintentional injuries. Asshown in Table 6, among the Indiana Latino population, the five leadingcauses of death were cancer (60.6 per 100,000 population), heart disease(55.6), unintentional injuries (25.2), stroke (16.1), and diabetes (14.3).Latinos were less likely to die from all five causes than African Americanor white adults in Indiana during this time period.

Prevalence of chronic conditions varies by race and ethnicity in Indiana.In 2014, Latinos had a lower prevalence of select chronic conditions thanother population groups. As shown in Table 7, Latinos reported a lowerprevalence of asthma (13 percent), diabetes (8 percent), and hypertension(17 percent) than African Americans or whites.

Table 6. Leading causes of death among Indiana adults, by race and ethnicity, 2010-2014

Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. Multiple Cause of Death 1999-2014 on CDC WONDER Online Database, released 2015

Note: "-" indicates data for specific population group and cause of death were unreliable.

Table 7. Prevalence of select chronic conditions among Indiana adults, by race and ethnicity, 2014


Note: Hypertension (high blood pressure) data based on 2013 BRFSS.

Hispanic or Latino (n= 3,610)

Black or AfricanAmerican (n=22,029) White (n=264,070) Asian (n=1,050)

Cause of death Rate per100,000 Rank Rate per

100,000 Rank Rate per100,000 Rank Rate per

100,000 Rank

Cancer 60.6 1 237.1 1 288.8 2 62.4 1

Heart disease 55.6 2 229.9 2 297.9 1 39.6 2

Accidents (unintentional injuries) 25.2 3 39.3 6 57.2 5 12.5 4

Stroke 16.1 4 55.6 3 66.6 4 16.3 3

Diabetes 14.3 5 48.6 4 37.2 7 7.3 6

Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis 9.5 6 12.6 13 15.3 12 - -

Intentional self-harm (suicide) 8.2 7 8.2 15 19.8 11 9.7 5

Assault (homicide) 8.2 8 37.8 7 2.9 - -

Nephritis (kidney inflammation) 6.8 9 34.1 8 28.7 8 6 7

Chronic lower respiratory diseases 6.4 10 41.5 5 91.7 3 5.6 8

Septicemia 6.2 11 21.7 10 20.0 10 - -

Alzheimer's disease 5.3 12 23.7 9 46.8 6 - -

Influenza and pneumonia 4.2 13 12.7 12 23.8 9 4.7 9

Chronic condition Hispanic or Latino Black or AfricanAmerican White Asian

Asthma 12.6% 18.7% 13.0% 4.7%

Diabetes 7.5% 17.9% 14.4% 4.7%

Hypertension 16.6% 46.7% 43.8% 17.6%

21

Table 8 includes select health risk factors by population group. Accordingto the BRFSS, “heavy drinking” refers to the self-reported consumptionof more than 60 drinks for men (an average of more than two drinks perday) and 30 drinks for women (an average of more than one drink perday) during the past month. In 2014, Latino adults (4.1 percent), 18years and older, in Indiana were slightly less likely than white adults (4.4percent), to report heavy drinking. Current cigarette smoking is definedby the BRFSS as currently smoking every day or on some days amongindividuals reporting having smoked at least 100 cigarettes during their

lifetime. The prevalence of “current smoking” was 12 percent for Latinos,22 percent for African Americans, 16 percent for whites, and 9 percent forAsians.

In 2014, 32 percent of Indiana adults were considered obese (i.e., theirbody mass index or BMI was greater than or equal to 30.0) (Table 8).African Americans (43 percent) and Latinos (34 percent) reported a high-er prevalence of obesity than whites (32 percent) or Asians (9 percent).As shown in Figure 17, approximately 30 percent of Latino adults inIndiana reported no “leisure-time physical activity.”

Table 8. Prevalence of heavy drinking, smoking, and obesity among Indiana adults, by race and ethnicity, 2014


Notes:1) Heavy drinking is defined as the self-reported consumption of on average more than two alcoholic beverages per day for men or more than one per day for women in the previous month.2) Current smoking is defined as currently smoking every day or on some days among individuals reporting having smoked at least 100 cigarettes during their lifetime. 3) Obesity is defined has a body mass index (BMI) over 30.

Risk factors Hispanic or Latino Black or AfricanAmerican White Asian

Alcohol use - heavy drinking 4.1% 3.6% 4.4% 0.8%

Tobacco use - current smokers 12.3% 22.0% 16.4% 9.4%

Obesity 33.7% 43.4% 31.5% 9.2%

Figure 17. Indiana adults who reported no physical activity or exercise (outside of work) during the past 30 days,by race and ethnicity, 2014


Hispanic or Latino

Black or AfricanAmerian

White

Asian

30.2%

32.1%

27.5%

21.3%

0% 10% 20% 30%

22

During 2010-14, 57 percent of pregnant Latino women initiated prenatalcare during the first trimester of pregnancy—one of the lowest ratesamong other population groups in Indiana (Table 9). However, duringthe same time period, Indiana Latinos had the lowest rate of low birth

weight babies—65.4 per 1,000 live births. The teen birth rate for Latinofemales aged 19 years and younger was 118.3 per 1,000 live births in2010-14.

Table 9. Maternal and infant health in Indiana, by race and ethnicity, 2010-2014

Source: United States Department of Health and Human Services (US DHHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS),Division of Vital Statistics, Natality public-use data 2007-2014

Notes:1) Teens include female youth aged 19 years and younger. 2) A newborn is considered to be of low weight if he or she weighes less than 2,500 grams at birth.

Indicator Hispanic or Latino Black or AfricanAmerican White Asian

% of pregnant women initiating prenatal care in the 1st trimester 56.5% 57.3% 72.3% 63.1%

Teen birth rate per 1,000 live births 118.3 141.4 79.8 22.4

Low birth weight infants per 1,000 live births 65.4 130.5 73.4 78.4

23

KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS This section includes a summary of the key informant interview processand concludes with an examination of interview findings and emergingthemes resulting from information gathered during the interviewprocess.

These interviews, conducted in fall 2014 and spring 2015, enabled PPIresearchers to incorporate perspectives of a diverse set of individualsfrom a variety of backgrounds including nonprofit organizations, thefaith-based community, higher education, as well as private consultingfirms. Interview participants were prompted with a number of questionsdesigned by PPI researchers with the goal of gathering information ontheir experiences working with the Latino community in Indiana. Whileparticipants were allowed flexibility to follow their own train of thoughtand to introduce topics of significance related to their own experience,key informant discussions focused primarily on the following set of ques-tions:

• What do you believe are the greatest needs of the Latino community inyour area?

• What do you see as the most significant challenges facing Latino com-munities in Indiana?

• What is needed to address these concerns?

• What entities are working to address these barriers and challenges?

• How is your organization helping to meet the needs of the Latino com-munity in your area?

• What services or programs are currently available that adequatelyaddress the needs of the community?

• What services do not exist that should?

• Can you recommend others to speak with and also include in the orga-nizational surveys that are knowledgeable about the needs of the Latinocommunity in your region and throughout Indiana?

• Do you have any additional thoughts you would like to share regardingneeds of the Latino community in your area and/or the state as a whole?

Key informants were selected based on recommendations of ILI.Following is a list of individuals who served as key informants to thisprocess:

• Edwin Arellano, Executive Director, Latino Coalition AgainstDomestic & Sexual Violence Inc.

• Sam Centellas, Executive Director, La Casa de Amistad, Inc.

• Steve Corona, Founder, Latinos Count

• Miriam Acevedo Davis, Executive Director, La Plaza

• Henry Fernandez, USA Funds

• Brother Moises Gutierrez, Director Office of InterculturalMinistry, Archdiocese of Indianapolis

• Gilberto Perez, Senior Director of Intercultural Development &Educational Partnerships, Goshen College

• Cynthia Rivas, Healthy East Chicago

• Alfonso Vidal, Vidal Plastics and President, Indiana Latino Expo

Interview findings and themes informed development of the Survey ofLatino-serving Organizations instrument and also helped PPI researchersidentify organizations and individuals for inclusion in the survey sample.While the key informants articulated a variety of perspectives in responseto the questions above, common themes emerged, as follows:

• The majority of key stakeholders conveyed that many serviceproviders are unable to keep up with demand and often lackresources, such as bilingual/bicultural staff, to meet growing Latinocommunity needs. Overall, key informants cited issues such asimmigration that remain important concerns for Latinos and thatimpact educational attainment and economic opportunities. Anumber of stakeholders explained that these issues are not uni-form across the state and that regional differences exist within theLatino community in Indiana. For instance, Latinos in the north-ern part of the state are more established, 3rd, 4th, and 5th gener-ation immigrants, while in the southeastern region, many Latinomembers of the community are new, first generation immigrants.

• The majority of key informants mentioned economic issues suchpoverty within the Latino community and how this impacting edu-cation, health, and well-being. Issues that impact economic mobilityinclude documentation issues (obtaining a driver’s licenses) as wellas access to capital for business creation were also discussed. Anumber of stakeholders mentioned that the lack of affordable andreliable public transportation has implications for seeking and main-taining employment as well as access to health care services.

• Education needs and barriers were a primary concern, includingaccess to quality education at all levels. Key informants highlightedobstacles that Indiana Latino residents regularly confront in termsof education, such as low expectations set for Latino students byschool personnel. In K-12 environment, stakeholders highlightedthe lack of bilingual educators and services to address needs ofEnglish Language Learners (ELLs), the need for new parent orien-tation, and ways to more fully engage Latino families. As a resultof these factors, Latino students tend to drop out of school inhigher numbers than other population groups. Access to highereducation and barriers to financial aid were also noted as areas ofconcern. Key informants spoke about Latino adults returning toschool for training and skills development and the need for institu-tions to respond with appropriate scheduling, remedial courseofferings and financial aid.

• Overall, health issues and access to affordable quality health careremain important issues reported by key informants. A numbercited health disparities between Latinos and other populationgroups, including the prevalence of certain diseases and chronicconditions (e.g., diabetes) and lack of access to affordable, qualityhealth care. Mental health issues also were raised as special chal-lenges within the Latino community, given associated stigma andlack of mental health services. In the area of health, key informants

24

SURVEY OF ORGANIZATIONS SERVINGTHE INDIANA LATINO COMMUNITY Survey MethodologyPPI researchers designed and administered the Survey of OrganizationsServing the Indiana Latino Community online between March and May2015. The primary goal of the survey was to gather the perspectives oforganizations and individuals throughout the state that are involved inproviding services to members of the Latino community. The survey cov-ered a range of topics of importance to the Latino community in Indiana,including 1) critical needs of the Latino community, 2) the scope andquality of available programs and services, 3) changes in demand for andgaps in service provision, and 4) collaboration among organizations serv-ing Latinos in the state (Appendix B).

The survey population consisted of representatives of organizations serv-ing the Indiana Latino community. The list of over 500 organizations andindividuals was compiled based on ILI-identified partners and organiza-tions and PPI research efforts that included the following:

• Contacting local community foundations in counties with highpercentages of Latino residents for assistance in identifying localorganizations

• Searching Guidestar database for nonprofit organizations thatserve immigrant communities

• Searching statewide for local YMCAs and contact info

• Gathering recommendations from key informants and communitystakeholders

• Snowball sampling based on responses to the survey questionrequest for additional organizations to survey

Researchers prepared an email invitation to request participation in thesurvey. The email explained the purpose of the survey and encouragedparticipation. In an effort to further boost the survey response rate,respondents also received separate email communications from theIndiana Latino Institute urging participation.

The survey request email provided each respondent with a link to theonline instrument. Follow-up emails were transmitted weekly to remindrespondents to start or complete the survey. Respondents were assuredthat all individual responses would remain strictly confidential and thatonly aggregate data, not individual results, would be analyzed andreported. The response rate for the survey was 24.6 percent. Once all fol-low-up activities had been completed, PPI researchers downloaded theonline database, cleaned, and prepared the survey data for analysis.

Figure 18. Which of the following categories BEST describes your organization?

Source: Indiana University Public Policy Institute, Survey of Organizations Serving the Indiana Latino Community, 2015

Local or community-based nonprofit

Educational institution (PreK-12 school or college/university)

Faith-based organization

Government (local, state, or national agency)

National nonprofit

Healthcare provider or hospital/hospital-affiliated program

Business (for-profiit or commercial)

Other

39%

19%

16%

7%

5%

3%

2%

9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

also discussed issues related to decreased funding for social pro-grams that promote access to healthcare opportunities and a lackof qualified bilingual health care providers.

• A common theme throughout the interviews was collaborationand how such efforts and partnerships are effective means of

meeting the needs and challenges facing the Indiana Latino com-munity. The majority of key informants cited benefits of collabora-tion, such as the financial, programmatic, and administrativeadvantages and increased capacity to ramp up services.

25

Overview of Respondent OrganizationsOrganization type and individual roleSurvey respondents represented a wide variety of organization typeslocated throughout the state of Indiana (Appendix C). When asked toidentify the organization type category that best describes them, 39 per-cent (50 of 129 respondents) identified their organizations as a local orcommunity-based nonprofit, and 19 percent (24 of 129 respondents) identi-fied their organizations as an educational institution (PreK-12 school or col-lege/university) (Figure 18). Faith-based organizations accounted for 16 per-cent of total survey respondents, and smaller portions of respondentorganizations were government agencies (local, state, or national), nationalnonprofits, and healthcare providers at 7 percent, 5 percent, and 3 percent,respectively. When asked to identify their individual role in their organi-zation, the largest portion of respondents identified themselves as a director (42 percent), while 39 percent identified their role as a staff member, and 3 percent identified their role as a board member (Figure 19).

The remaining 16 percent of respondents selected other in describingtheir organizational role.

Serving the communityRespondent organizations have been serving their Indiana communi-ties anywhere from 1 to 194 years. The mean number of years of com-munity service for respondent organizations was 40, and the mediannumber of years serving the community was 22. Most respondentorganizations (57 percent) are located in the Central Indiana region(see Map 7). Twenty-nine percent of respondent organizations arelocated in the Northern Indiana region, and the remaining 14 percentare located in the South region. When asked to describe the largestgeographic area served by their organization, 32 percent of respondentsindicated their organization serves the county in which they are located(Figure 20). Nearly equal portions of respondents identified the state (24percent) and their city/town (23 percent) as the largest geographic areathey serve. Only 5 percent of respondents indicated they serve primari-ly their surrounding neighborhood.

Figure 19. Please identify your role in the organization

Source: Indiana University Public Policy Institute, Survey of Organizations Serving the Indiana LatinoCommunity, 2015

Staff member39%

Director42%

Other16%Board member

3%

Number of years your organizationhas been serving the community

Average = 40 years

Median = 22 years

Range = 1 to 194 years

26

Map 7. Survey repondents by Indiana region


North Region29%

Central Region57%

South Region14% n = 119 respondents

(where county was reported)

Indiana Region

North

Central

South

27

Twenty-one (21) percent of respondent organizations reported that theyprimarily serve the Latino community, and 7 percent reported that theyserve the Latino community exclusively (Figure 21). The majority ofrespondents (72 percent) indicated their organizations serve the Latinocommunity, but not primarily or exclusively.

Organization mission, programs, and servicesThe stated primary purpose or mission of respondent organizations var-ied greatly and covered a wide range of specialty areas from education to

healthcare to legal services. One in 5 respondents identified educationand literacy as part of their organizational purpose, and about 8 percentreported the provision of language, translation, or interpretation servicesas part of their mission (results not shown in an exhibit). Approximately19 percent identified provision of family health services as a primary pur-pose, and 15 percent (20 of 129 respondents) reported a faith-based serv-ice as a primary component of their mission.

Figure 20. What is the largest geographic area your organization serves?


County

State

City/town

Multiple counties

Neighborhood

Nation

Other

32%

24%

23%

12%

5%

3%

7%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Figure 21. Does your organization (or programs within your organization) serve the Latino community or persons? (Please select the option that is MOST applicable to your organization.)


My organizationEXCLUSIVELY

serves the Latinocommunity or

persons.

My organizationPRIMARILY serves

the Latino communityor persons.

My organizationserves the Latino

community or persons,but NOT primarily or

exclusively.

72%

7%

21%

28

Programs and Service ProvisionMost respondent organizations reported a multi-faceted approach toproviding services to the community. Table 10 shows that 35 percent ofrespondent organizations provide programs and services that supportcommunity improvement and capacity building. A large portion of respon-dent organizations provide education services in a variety of programareas: K-12 (28 percent), preschool/early childhood education (25 per-cent), English as a new language classes (25 percent), adult learners (19percent), and post-secondary/college/university (19 percent). Many

respondents also reported providing a variety of health-related servicesprograms: Health (29 percent), food/nutrition assistance (22 percent),mental health and crisis intervention (10 percent), developmentally dis-abled services (9 percent), and senior/elder services (7 percent).

Perceived needs and gaps in service provisionSurvey participants were asked to identify up to five critical needs of theLatino community. One-third of survey respondents identified access toaffordable healthcare (insurance, Medicaid eligibility) as one of the mostcritical needs (Table 11). A positive relationship with law enforcement (will-ingness to report crimes/cooperate with police, Spanish-speaking offi-

Table 10. In which of the following areas does your organization provide programs and/or services (Please mark ALL that apply.)


Note: Respondents were allowed to select multiple responses.

Type of service Number of respondents % of respondents

Community improvement and capacity building 45 35%

Youth development 41 32%

Health 38 29%

Civil rights, social action, advocacy 37 29%

Arts, culture, humanities 36 28%

Education: K-12 36 28%

Language services 35 27%

Immigrant services 33 26%

Education: Preschool/early childhood education 32 25%

Education: English as a New Language (ENL) classes 32 25%

Cultural competency training 30 23%

Food/nutrition assistance 28 22%

Education: Adult learners 25 19%

Education: Post-secondary/college/university 24 19%

Financial assistance 23 18%

Recreation and sports 23 18%

Child care 22 17%

Religion-related 22 17%

Employment assistance and job training 21 16%

Emergency assistance and homeless services 17 13%

Domestic violence prevention/intervention 16 12%

Legal services – immigration 16 12%

Mental health and crisis intervention 13 10%

Developmentally disabled services 12 9%

Legal services – non-immigration 9 7%

Senior/elder services 9 7%

Transportation services 9 7%

Public safety or emergency services 8 6%

Housing 7 5%

Other 23 18%

Total number of survey respondents 129 na

29

cers) and bilingual services (e.g., translation of written materials, bilingualstaff, qualified interpreters, translators) were identified by 29 percent ofrespondents as most critical needs. Roughly one-quarter of respondentsindicated assistance with issues deriving from documentation status (e.g.,obtaining a driver license/ID) (25 percent); English language adult learnerprograms (24 percent); access to higher education (24 percent); and resourcesfor higher education students (e.g., internships, scholarships, professionaldevelopment opportunities) (24 percent) were critical needs.

The vast majority of survey respondents conveyed that there is a gap

between Latino community needs and available resources or service (90percent). When considered by most common type of organizations thatparticipated in the survey, 100 percent of faith-based organizations, 84percent of local or community-based nonprofits, and 83 percent of edu-cational institutions reported a gap in available resources or service (notshown in exhibit). Overall, some of the critical needs were identified asareas where respondents see gaps (Table 12). One-half or more ofrespondents identified positive relationship with law enforcement (57 per-cent); bilingual services (55 percent); and access to affordable healthcare (50

Table 11. What do you think are the MOST critical needs of the Latino community or persons in your organization’s service area? Please indicate up to 5critical needs; these needs may be in one or more areas across the following categories:




Access to affordable healthcare (insurance, Medicaid eligibility) 42 33%

Positive relationship with law enforcement (willingness to report crimes/cooperate withpolice, Spanish-speaking officers) 38 29%

Bilingual services (e.g., translation of written materials, bilingual staff, qualified interpreters,translators) 37 29%

Assistance with issues deriving from documentation status (e.g., obtaining a driverlicense/ID) 32 25%

English language adult learner programs 31 24%

Access to higher education 31 24%

Resources for higher education students (e.g., internships, scholarships, professional devel-opment opportunities) 31 24%

Awareness of eligibility/requirements AND help applying for assistance from state and fed-eral programs 29 22%

Parental involvement programming in schools 29 22%

Community resource collaboration and service network integration 28 22%

Job availability - employment opportunities 26 20%

Access to preventative health services (e.g., education, promotion, vaccinations, screenings) 25 19%

Early childhood education 23 18%

Access to primary care and treatment of chronic diseases 23 18%

Culturally-sensitive service provision 20 16%

Youth mentoring/tutoring 20 16%

High school equivalency classes for adults 19 15%

Literacy classes in Spanish 16 12%

Affordable housing 13 10%

Job training 13 10%

Mental health services 12 9%

English Language Learner (ELL) services in K-12 schools 10 8%

Substance abuse services 10 8%

Access to emergency services (police, fire, EMS) 10 8%

Reliable transportation 10 8%

Crime/violence prevention/intervention 8 6%

Access to affordable, nutritious food 6 5%

Recreational opportunities 2 2%

Senior/elder care 1 1%

Other 4 3%


30

percent) as areas where a gap exists in meeting critical needs.

Bilingual servicesWhen asked about bilingual services in the community, 83 percent ofrespondents indicated a need for bilingual service provision to meetLatino community needs in their area. Seventy-three (73) percent ofrespondents reported their organization provides bilingual staff, includ-ing qualified interpreters and translators, to Latino clients if needed, and85 percent indicated their organization provides translated written and/orelectronic materials to Latino clients if needed.

Figure 22 summarizes respondent perceptions of the adequacy of bilin-gual services provided by community program/service area. Bilingualservices in religion-related and K-12 education program areas were per-ceived to be the most favorable, with 85 percent and 64 percent ofrespondents reporting these bilingual services as good or excellent/verygood, respectively. In many program/service areas, more than 50 percentof respondents reported the provision of bilingual services as barely ade-quate/poor/inadequate. Transportation services, financial assistance, employ-ment assistance and job training, developmentally disabled services, and mental

Table 12. Where do you see a gap in meeting critical needs? (Please mark ANY that apply from across the categories below.)




Positive relationship with law enforcement (willingness to report crimes/cooperate withpolice, Spanish-speaking officers) 64 57%

Bilingual services (e.g., translation of written materials, bilingual staff, qualified interpreters,translators) 62 55%

Access to affordable healthcare (insurance, Medicaid eligibility) 56 50%

Awareness of eligibility/requirements AND help applying for assistance from state and fed-eral programs 54 48%

Assistance with issues deriving from documentation status (e.g., obtaining a driver’slicense/ID) 51 45%

Resources for higher education students (e.g., internships, scholarships, professional devel-opment opportunities) 46 41%

Parental involvement programming in schools 46 41%

Job availability - employment opportunities 45 40%

Job training 45 40%

Community resource collaboration and service network integration 43 38%

Access to preventative health services (e.g., education, promotion, vaccinations, screenings) 42 37%

Access to higher education 41 36%

Access to primary care and treatment of chronic diseases 40 35%

English language adult learner programs 38 34%

Culturally-sensitive service provision 38 34%

Youth mentoring/tutoring 37 33%

Literacy classes in Spanish 35 31%

Affordable housing 35 31%

Mental health services 33 29%

High school equivalency classes for adults 32 28%

Crime/violence prevention/intervention 32 28%

Reliable transportation 30 27%

Substance abuse services 28 25%

English Language Learner (ELL) services in K-12 schools 27 24%

Early childhood education 24 21%

Access to emergency services (police, fire, EMS) 22 19%

Access to affordable, nutritious food 18 16%

Recreational opportunities 15 13%

Senior/elder care 13 12%

Other (please specify): 4 4%


31

health and crisis intervention were all program/service areas where three-quarters or more of respondents described the provision of bilingualservices as barely adequate/poor/inadequate.

Changes in demandSurvey respondents were asked about changing demand for services orprograms for the Latino or overall community over the last three years.As shown in Figure 23, roughly 70 percent of survey respondents indicat-ed that demand for services or programs had increased significantly (bymore than 25 percent) or slightly (10 – 25 percent) both for those thatserve the Latino and overall community.

When asked if, in the last three years, they have been able to fully meetdemand for service or programs among Latino clients, more than one-

83 percent of respondents indicated there is a need forbilingual service provision to meet Latino communityneeds in their area.

73 percent of respondents reported their organization pro-vides bilingual staff, including qualified interpreters andtranslators, to Latino clients if needed.

85 percent of respondents indicated their organizationprovides translated written and/or electronic materials toLatino clients if needed.

FIgure 22. Do organizations/agencies that provide the following services to Latinos in your community provide adequate bilingual services (e.g., bilin-gual staff, translated written and/or electronic materials)?


Religion-related

Education: K-12

Education: Preschool/early childhood education

Recreation and sports

Health

Education: Post-secondary/college/university

Food/nutrition assistance

Legal service - immigration

Youth development

Immigrant services

Domestic violence prevention/intervention

Education: Adult learners

Child care

Public safety or emergency services

Civil rights, social action, advocacy

Legal services - non-immigration

Housing

Arts, culture, humantities

Community improvement and capacity building

Senior/elder services

Emergency assistance and homeless services

Transportation services

Financial assistance

Employment assistance and job training

Developmentally disabled services

Mental health and crisis intervention

15% 54% 31%

36% 43% 21%

40% 45% 15%

41% 45% 14%

47% 43% 10%

50% 37% 13%

51% 42% 7%

53% 36% 11%

54% 35% 11%

54% 36% 10%

56% 30% 14%

60% 28% 12%

62% 35% 3%

63% 31% 7%

64% 29% 7%

64% 25% 10%

65% 31% 4%

67% 27% 6%

68% 26% 6%

72% 22% 7%

72% 24% 4%

75% 21% 4%

77% 18% 5%

78% 20% 2%

79% 19% 2%

81% 16% 3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Barely adequate/Poor/Inadequate Good Excellend/Very good

32

half (56 percent) of respondents reported they were not able to fully meetdemand for services or programs among Latino clients. When consideredby organization type, less than one-half of educational institutions (43percent), local or community-based nonprofits (38 percent), and faith-based organizations (37 percent) reported they were able to fully meetdemand for services or programs among Latino clients (not shown inexhibit). Three-quarters of survey participants indicated that when theirorganizations are unable to meet Latino client demand for services, theyrefer clients to other organizations. Forty-four percent of respondentsreported that clients seek assistance from personal networks, such as family or

friends. Over one-third (38 percent) conveyed that client needs remainunmet and close to one-third (31 percent) reported Latino clients seeksimilar services from another organization on their own (Figure 24).

A substantial majority (87 percent) of survey participants reported that theyanticipate that demand for their organization’s services or programs thatserve the Latino community will increase significantly (44 percent) or slightly(43 percent). Twelve percent believed demand will remain stable (Figure25). Over one-half reported they do not anticipate being able to fully meetfuture demand for services or programs that serve Latino clients.

Figure 23. How have demands for your organization’s services or programs that serve the LATINO COMMUNITY (or the OVERALL COMMUNITY) changedover the last three years?


Increased significantly (by more than 25%)

Increased slightly (by 10 - 25%)

Stayed more or less the same

Decreased slightly (by 10-25%)

Decreased significantly (by more than 25%)

30%

31%

41%

41%

24%

25%

3%

2%

1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Figure 24. When your organization cannot meet Latino clients demand for services, how are Latino client needs met? (Please select ALL that apply.)

We refer clients to other organizations.

They seek assistance from personal networks (family, friends, etc.).

Their needs remain unmet.

They seek similar services from another organization(s) on their own.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Overallcommunity

Latinocommunity

75%

44%

38%

31%


33

Collaboration and advocacy related to Latino issuesSurvey participants were asked to report on whether their organizationwas involved with other organizations/agencies in collaborations and/ornetworks for the purpose of providing services to members of the Latinocommunity (Figure 26). The majority of respondents indicated theirorganizations are involved in informal networks, including cooperation,coordination, or generally working together, with other organizations.Roughly 40 percent are involved in formal collaborations, such as a legal,fiscal, or programmatic exchanges, with other organizations. Only 6 per-

cent of survey respondents indicated their organizations are not involvedin any collaborations/networks.

Among organizations that reported collaborating/networking, 31 percentindicated that the partner organizations/agencies serve primarily Latinosresiding in the same city/town where their own organizations are located(Figure 27). Just over one-quarter of respondents reported that the part-ner organizations serve primarily Latinos residing in the same countywhere their organizations are located. Twenty-three percent partner withorganizations/agencies that serve primarily Latinos throughout the state.When asked to describe benefits to their organization and the Latinocommunity that resulted from collaborating and networking, respon-

Figure 25. Over the next three years, I anticipate that demand for my organization’s services or programs that serve the Latino community or persons will:

Increase significantly (by more than 25%)

Increase slightly (by 10-25%)

Stay the same

Decrease slightly (by 10-25%)

Decrease dignificantly (by more than 25%)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

44%

43%

12%

1%

0%


Figure 26. For the purpose of providing services to members of the Latino community, is your organization currently involved with otherorganizations/agencies in collaborations AND/OR networks?

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

70%

39%

6%


Involved in INFORMAL NETWORKS (cooperation, coordination, working together) with other organizations

Involved in FORMAL COLLABORATIONS (legal, fiscal, or programmat-ic exchanges) with other organizations

NOT involved any collaborations/networks

34

dents mentioned expanded services, improved access to resources,increased awareness and understanding, among other positive outcomes.

Survey respondents were asked about advocacy and political activitiesrelated to Latino issues. As shown in Figure 28, most respondents (60percent) reported that their organization supports or is directly linked to anorganization that seeks to promote positions relevant to Latinos. Reportedadvocacy varied by organization type. Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) ofeducational institutions, 57 percent of faith-based organizations, and 54percent of local or community-based nonprofits report their organizationadvocates for positions or issues related to the Latino community. Whenasked to describe the groups and/or issues related to the Latino commu-

nity with which their organization is most extensively involved, respon-dents listed a variety of specific issues and groups either within theirservice areas or related to their organizations’ missions and activities.Issues ranged from immigration reform to accessing higher educationalopportunities to health initiatives.

Among respondents that indicated their organizations are not involvedin advocacy regarding the Latino community, the most common reasonsgiven included 1) advocacy for a specific community was not part of theorganization’s mission, 2) their organization/agency was not allowed toadvocate, or 3) lack of staff and organizational capacity to be involved inthese activities.

Figure 27. The partner organizations/agencies involved in these collaborations/networks serve primarily:

Latinos resident in the SAME CITY/TOWN where my organization is located

Latinos residing in the SAME COUNTY where my organization is located

Latino communities throughout the STATE OF INDIANA

Latinos residing in SURROUNDING COUNTIES where my organization is located

31%

28%

23%

18%


0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Figure 28. Does your organization advocate for positions or issues related to the Latino community?


NO, my organization isnot involved in of these

types of activities

YES, my organizationsupports or is directly

linked to an organization that seeks

to promte positions relevant to Latinos.

40%

60%

36

Appendix A. Indiana public school corporation enrollment, by English learners, special education, and free/reduced price meals, 2014

Low < < > > High


School Corporation Name(n=289) County

Totalenroll-ment

Hispanicstudents

%Hispanic

Corp.rank

(on %)

Englishlearner

students % EL

Corp.rank

(on %)

Specialeducationstudents

%Special

education

Corp.rank

(on %)

Studentsreceivingfree andreduced

price meals

% Freeand

reduced

Corp.rank

(on %)

Adams Central Community Schools Adams 1,224 30 2.5 187 25 2.0 101 142 11.6 251 326 26.6 258North Adams Community Schools Adams 1,834 230 12.5 44 25 1.4 125 247 13.5 187 866 47.2 133South Adams Schools Adams 1,350 170 12.6 43 91 6.7 37 183 13.6 183 629 46.6 137Southwest Allen County Metropolitan SchoolDistrict Allen 6,995 307 4.4 121 84 1.2 130 596 8.5 287 1,037 14.8 285

Northwest Allen County Schools Allen 6,853 270 3.9 131 107 1.6 116 815 11.9 243 1,185 17.3 283Fort Wayne Community Schools Allen 30,783 4,683 15.2 35 2,789 9.1 28 4,503 14.6 140 21,741 70.6 19East Allen County Schools Allen 9,114 637 7.0 83 728 8.0 33 991 10.9 265 4,441 48.7 119Bartholomew County School Corp Bartholomew 11,541 1,324 11.5 51 897 7.8 34 1,415 12.3 227 4,958 43.0 162Flat Rock-Hawcreek School Corp Bartholomew 913 25 2.7 169 18 2.0 106 136 14.9 135 400 43.8 155Benton Community School Corp Benton 1,890 151 8.0 73 57 3.0 77 425 22.5 8 898 47.5 129Blackford County Schools Blackford 1,807 35 1.9 216 12 0.7 172 294 16.3 94 976 54.0 82Western Boone County Community School Corp Boone 1,766 48 2.7 170 2 0.1 249 266 15.1 129 652 36.9 214Zionsville Community Schools Boone 6,266 214 3.4 145 52 0.8 156 811 12.9 210 323 5.2 289Lebanon Community School Corp Boone 3,527 192 5.4 98 69 2.0 108 616 17.5 62 1,459 41.4 179Brown County County School Corp Brown 2,128 47 2.2 194 9 0.4 200 525 24.7 2 1,147 53.9 83Carroll Consolidated School Corp Carroll 1,120 40 3.6 141 5 0.4 198 113 10.1 280 430 38.4 200Delphi Community School Corp Carroll 1,504 141 9.4 62 78 5.2 48 154 10.2 278 798 53.1 87Pioneer Regional School Corp Cass 953 49 5.1 102 12 1.3 129 109 11.4 256 378 39.7 191Southeastern School Corp Cass 1,483 88 5.9 90 37 2.5 86 142 9.6 282 527 35.5 220Logansport Community School Corp Cass 4,171 1,454 34.9 9 1,027 24.6 5 485 11.6 249 2,435 58.4 55West Clark Community Schools Clark 4,755 193 4.1 129 112 2.4 91 654 13.8 174 1,674 35.2 222Clarksville Community School Corp Clark 1,327 111 8.4 70 48 3.6 64 231 17.4 65 877 66.1 29Greater Clark County Schools Clark 10,553 1,154 10.9 56 650 6.2 43 1,731 16.4 89 5,932 56.2 64Clay Community Schools Clay 4,362 78 1.8 225 22 0.5 189 835 19.1 34 2,313 53.0 88Clinton Central School Corp Clinton 1,047 21 2.0 213 3 0.3 221 139 13.3 194 444 42.4 172Clinton Prairie School Corp Clinton 1,054 76 7.2 81 24 2.3 93 132 12.5 222 450 42.7 166Frankfort Community Schools Clinton 3,183 1,388 43.6 6 975 30.6 2 412 12.9 209 2,302 72.3 16Rossville Consolidated School District Clinton 993 20 2.0 211 7 0.7 170 125 12.6 221 255 25.7 263Crawford County Community School Corp Crawford 1,578 16 1.0 265 3 0.2 234 267 16.9 76 957 60.6 47Barr-Reeve Community School Corp Daviess 760 2 0.3 288 0 0.0 266 71 9.3 283 199 26.2 261North Daviess Community Schools Daviess 1,192 24 2.0 212 49 4.1 57 198 16.6 80 503 42.2 174Washington Community School Corp Daviess 2,574 418 16.2 32 226 8.8 30 512 19.9 22 1,611 62.6 38Sunman-Dearborn Community School Corp Dearborn 4,020 44 1.1 261 19 0.5 194 535 13.3 192 989 24.6 267South Dearborn Community School Corp Dearborn 2,749 27 1.0 268 4 0.1 242 507 18.4 44 1,249 45.4 145Lawrenceburg Community School Corp Dearborn 1,993 25 1.3 255 8 0.4 204 312 15.7 111 861 43.2 159Decatur County Community Schools Decatur 2,132 28 1.3 250 7 0.3 215 365 17.1 72 998 46.8 135Greensburg Community Schools Decatur 2,297 50 2.2 195 19 0.8 158 318 13.8 170 1,200 52.2 95DeKalb County Eastern Community SchoolDistrict DeKalb 1,375 46 3.3 147 6 0.4 199 205 14.9 134 661 48.1 126

Garrett-Keyser-Butler Community Schools DeKalb 1,760 56 3.2 151 30 1.7 112 238 13.5 184 911 51.8 97DeKalb County Central United School District DeKalb 3,717 93 2.5 183 37 1.0 145 462 12.4 223 1,547 41.6 178Delaware Community School Corp Delaware 2,577 34 1.3 249 5 0.2 232 414 16.1 103 1,059 41.1 181Wes-Del Community Schools Delaware 850 26 3.1 158 5 0.6 179 141 16.6 81 367 43.2 160

37

Appendix A. (continued from previous page)Low < < > > High



Totalenroll-ment

Hispanicstudents

%Hispanic

Corp.rank

(on %)

Englishlearner

students % EL

Corp.rank

(on %)


%Special

education

Corp.rank

(on %)


price meals

% Freeand

reduced

Corp.rank

(on %)

Liberty-Perry Community School Corp Delaware 1,097 4 0.4 285 1 0.1 255 178 16.2 97 528 48.1 125Cowan Community School Corp Delaware 751 6 0.8 274 0 0.0 266 86 11.5 255 243 32.4 235Mt Pleasant Township Community School Corp Delaware 2,403 50 2.1 200 38 1.6 114 308 12.8 213 780 32.5 233Daleville Community Schools Delaware 835 6 0.7 277 0 0.0 266 64 7.7 288 243 29.1 249Muncie Community Schools Delaware 6,568 213 3.2 149 70 1.1 138 1,369 20.8 15 4,962 75.5 9Northeast Dubois County School Corp Dubois 1,014 6 0.6 278 3 0.3 219 199 19.6 27 286 28.2 255Southeast Dubois County School Corp Dubois 1,358 36 2.7 172 15 1.1 135 143 10.5 273 322 23.7 271Southwest Dubois County School Corp Dubois 1,754 408 23.3 16 235 13.4 19 235 13.4 190 815 46.5 139Greater Jasper Consolidated Schools Dubois 3,234 387 12.0 46 203 6.3 42 385 11.9 240 976 30.2 245Fairfield Community Schools Elkhart 2,092 104 5.0 105 262 12.5 22 253 12.1 232 505 24.1 270Baugo Community Schools Elkhart 1,898 153 8.1 72 78 4.1 58 206 10.9 267 774 40.8 182Concord Community Schools Elkhart 5,186 1,486 28.7 12 975 18.8 8 698 13.5 189 3,017 58.2 57Middlebury Community Schools Elkhart 4,386 357 8.1 71 360 8.2 31 480 10.9 262 1,352 30.8 240Wa-Nee Community Schools Elkhart 3,029 228 7.5 76 186 6.1 44 346 11.4 257 1,034 34.1 227Elkhart Community Schools Elkhart 13,070 3,879 29.7 10 2,249 17.2 9 2,006 15.3 122 8,830 67.6 25Goshen Community Schools Elkhart 6,497 3,157 48.6 3 1,857 28.6 3 823 12.7 218 4,477 68.9 23Fayette County School Corp Fayette 3,761 57 1.5 241 1 0.0 265 572 15.2 127 2,334 62.1 41New Albany-Floyd County ConsolidatedSchools Floyd 11,307 472 4.2 125 227 2.0 102 1,801 15.9 105 4,991 44.1 153

Attica Consolidated School Corp Fountain 848 22 2.6 177 3 0.4 209 159 18.8 39 472 55.7 69Covington Community School Corp Fountain 985 43 4.4 123 15 1.5 120 153 15.5 112 370 37.6 209Southeast Fountain School Corp Fountain 1,151 57 5.0 106 18 1.6 115 165 14.3 153 561 48.7 118Franklin County Community School Corp Franklin 2,787 16 0.6 279 3 0.1 252 397 14.2 157 1,348 48.4 124Rochester Community School Corp Fulton 1,876 94 5.0 104 18 1.0 148 289 15.4 119 946 50.4 104Caston School Corp Fulton 764 40 5.2 100 7 0.9 150 93 12.2 230 318 41.6 177East Gibson School Corp Gibson 926 5 0.5 281 2 0.2 230 188 20.3 17 335 36.2 217North Gibson School Corp Gibson 2,091 43 2.1 206 15 0.7 169 513 24.5 3 1,047 50.1 107South Gibson School Corp Gibson 1,997 25 1.3 256 0 0.0 266 369 18.5 43 500 25.0 266Eastbrook Community School Corp Grant 1,610 21 1.3 252 10 0.6 176 229 14.2 158 622 38.6 199Madison-Grant United School Corp Grant 1,367 33 2.4 188 0 0.0 266 206 15.1 128 614 44.9 148Mississinewa Community School Corp Grant 2,545 80 3.1 155 16 0.6 175 332 13.0 202 1,604 63.0 36Marion Community Schools Grant 3,727 354 9.5 60 165 4.4 54 527 14.1 160 2,797 75.0 12Bloomfield School District Greene 915 19 2.1 202 0 0.0 266 100 10.9 263 355 38.8 196Eastern Greene County School District Greene 1,294 23 1.8 226 4 0.3 218 219 16.9 75 555 42.9 164Linton-Stockton School Corp Greene 1,364 34 2.5 184 1 0.1 261 134 9.8 281 714 52.3 94Shakamak Schools Metropolitan School District Greene 821 14 1.7 228 1 0.1 246 108 13.2 200 463 56.4 62White River Valley School District Greene 811 22 2.7 171 0 0.0 266 95 11.7 247 426 52.5 92Hamilton Southeastern Schools Hamilton 20,524 1,128 5.5 96 550 2.7 85 2,089 10.2 279 2,815 13.7 287Hamilton Heights School Corp Hamilton 2,264 60 2.7 173 12 0.5 187 338 14.9 133 711 31.4 237Westfield-Washington Schools Hamilton 6,759 508 7.5 77 261 3.9 62 972 14.4 150 1,141 16.9 284Sheridan Community Schools Hamilton 1,051 32 3.0 159 4 0.4 208 189 18.0 56 400 38.1 204Carmel Clay Schools Hamilton 15,912 396 2.5 185 537 3.4 68 1,413 8.9 285 1,627 10.2 288Noblesville Schools Hamilton 9,780 441 4.5 115 300 3.1 73 1,287 13.2 199 2,376 24.3 268Southern Hancock County Community SchoolCorp Hancock 3,283 68 2.1 204 21 0.6 173 464 14.1 161 609 18.6 281

Greenfield-Central Community Schools Hancock 4,621 87 1.9 218 15 0.3 216 860 18.6 40 1,622 35.1 223Mount Vernon Community School Corp Hancock 3,545 114 3.2 150 19 0.5 185 499 14.1 164 909 25.6 264Eastern Hancock County Community SchoolCorp Hancock 1,146 13 1.1 259 2 0.2 237 202 17.6 60 353 30.8 241

38




Totalenroll-ment

Hispanicstudents

%Hispanic

Corp.rank

(on %)

Englishlearner

students % EL

Corp.rank

(on %)


%Special

education

Corp.rank

(on %)


price meals

% Freeand

reduced

Corp.rank

(on %)

Lanesville Community School Corp Harrison 691 7 1.0 266 1 0.1 243 80 11.6 252 134 19.4 280North Harrison Community School Corp Harrison 2,200 44 2.0 214 2 0.1 256 384 17.5 63 961 43.7 156South Harrison Community Schools Harrison 3,127 79 2.5 181 42 1.3 127 506 16.2 99 1,342 42.9 163North West Hendricks Schools Hendricks 1,904 48 2.5 182 4 0.2 231 213 11.2 260 401 21.1 275Brownsburg Community School Corp Hendricks 8,032 354 4.4 119 182 2.3 94 850 10.6 271 1,885 23.5 272Avon Community School Corp Hendricks 8,886 693 7.8 75 376 4.2 56 1,207 13.6 182 2,246 25.3 265Danville Community School Corp Hendricks 2,579 51 2.0 215 18 0.7 171 276 10.7 269 753 29.2 248Plainfield Community School Corp Hendricks 5,165 210 4.1 128 87 1.7 113 718 13.9 167 1,537 29.8 246Mill Creek Community School Corp Hendricks 1,576 14 0.9 272 17 1.1 137 229 14.5 147 530 33.6 228Blue River Valley Schools Henry 608 10 1.6 231 0 0.0 266 87 14.3 154 255 41.9 175South Henry School Corp Henry 803 12 1.5 242 4 0.5 191 119 14.8 138 389 48.4 123Shenandoah School Corp Henry 1,387 10 0.7 276 0 0.0 266 236 17.0 74 529 38.1 202New Castle Community School Corp Henry 3,532 121 3.4 144 14 0.4 205 698 19.8 25 2,053 58.1 58C. A. Beard Memorial School Corp Henry 1,283 7 0.5 280 3 0.2 227 231 18.0 55 594 46.3 140Taylor Community School Corp Howard 1,278 59 4.6 114 10 0.8 163 311 24.3 4 660 51.6 98Northwestern School Corp Howard 1,727 61 3.5 142 13 0.8 165 207 12.0 238 452 26.2 262Eastern Howard School Corp Howard 1,451 56 3.9 134 0 0.0 266 221 15.2 125 452 31.2 239Western School Corp Howard 2,651 68 2.6 179 13 0.5 192 306 11.5 253 812 30.6 242Kokomo-Center Township Consolidated School Corp Howard 6,690 311 4.6 113 132 2.0 105 1,323 19.8 24 4,625 69.1 22Huntington County Community School Corp Huntington 5,595 163 2.9 163 28 0.5 190 903 16.1 100 2,606 46.6 138Medora Community School Corp Jackson 254 4 1.6 237 0 0.0 266 57 22.4 9 186 73.2 14Seymour Community Schools Jackson 4,290 643 15.0 36 385 9.0 29 588 13.7 177 2,343 54.6 77Brownstown Central Community School Corp Jackson 1,659 40 2.4 189 2 0.1 247 240 14.5 149 672 40.5 183Crothersville Community Schools Jackson 545 11 2.0 210 6 1.1 136 106 19.4 29 249 45.7 143Kankakee Valley School Corp Jasper 3,527 300 8.5 68 128 3.6 63 476 13.5 186 1,305 37.0 213Rensselaer Central School Corp Jasper 1,685 122 7.2 80 54 3.2 71 290 17.2 69 798 47.4 131Jay School Corp Jay 3,465 127 3.7 138 75 2.2 99 829 23.9 5 1,902 54.9 76Madison Consolidated Schools Jefferson 3,003 117 3.9 133 60 2.0 103 442 14.7 139 1,654 55.1 74Southwestern Jefferson County ConsolidatedSchools Jefferson 1,338 53 4.0 130 29 2.2 98 220 16.4 85 724 54.1 81

Jennings County Schools Jennings 4,697 208 4.4 117 54 1.1 133 911 19.4 31 2,830 60.3 50Clark-Pleasant Community School Corp Johnson 6,277 229 3.6 139 224 3.6 65 832 13.3 196 2,839 45.2 147Center Grove Community School Corp Johnson 7,735 279 3.6 140 111 1.4 122 1,005 13.0 206 1,500 19.4 279Edinburgh Community School Corp Johnson 945 42 4.4 116 30 3.2 72 181 19.2 33 630 66.7 27Franklin Community School Corp Johnson 5,033 221 4.4 120 67 1.3 128 692 13.7 175 2,136 42.4 171Greenwood Community School Corp Johnson 3,773 331 8.8 66 182 4.8 52 539 14.3 155 1,744 46.2 142Nineveh-Hensley-Jackson United School Corp Johnson 1,837 24 1.3 251 3 0.2 239 264 14.4 152 611 33.3 230North Knox School Corp Knox 1,333 34 2.6 180 2 0.2 241 170 12.8 216 690 51.8 96South Knox School Corp Knox 1,194 12 1.0 267 0 0.0 266 155 13.0 208 363 30.4 243Vincennes Community School Corp Knox 2,678 82 3.1 157 24 0.9 152 435 16.2 96 1,642 61.3 44Wawasee Community School Corp Kosciusko 3,086 329 10.7 57 149 4.8 51 546 17.7 59 1,408 45.6 144Warsaw Community Schools Kosciusko 7,106 1,328 18.7 28 779 11.0 25 992 14.0 166 3,491 49.1 112Tippecanoe Valley School Corp Fulton 1,994 221 11.1 54 116 5.8 46 345 17.3 68 1,148 57.6 59Whitko Community School Corp Kosciusko 1,625 30 1.8 220 10 0.6 177 316 19.4 30 723 44.5 151Prairie Heights Community School Corp LaGrange 1,371 60 4.4 122 24 1.8 110 200 14.6 143 614 44.8 150Westview School Corp LaGrange 2,347 43 1.8 221 635 27.1 4 282 12.0 234 942 40.1 185Lakeland School Corp LaGrange 2,160 348 16.1 33 278 12.9 20 300 13.9 168 1,191 55.1 73Hanover Community School Corp Lake 2,177 221 10.2 58 53 2.4 90 224 10.3 277 579 26.6 259River Forest Community School Corp Lake 1,478 621 42.0 7 205 13.9 18 204 13.8 171 1,125 76.1 8

39




Totalenroll-ment

Hispanicstudents

%Hispanic

Corp.rank

(on %)

Englishlearner

students % EL

Corp.rank

(on %)


%Special

education

Corp.rank

(on %)


price meals

% Freeand

reduced

Corp.rank

(on %)

Merrillville Community School Lake 6,756 1,285 19.0 26 199 2.9 79 804 11.9 241 4,108 60.8 46Lake Central School Corp Lake 9,747 1,413 14.5 37 263 2.7 84 1,336 13.7 176 1,969 20.2 277Tri-Creek School Corp Lake 3,454 323 9.4 63 53 1.5 119 356 10.3 276 837 24.2 269Lake Ridge Schools Lake 2,057 527 25.6 14 84 4.1 59 277 13.5 188 1,664 80.9 4Crown Point Community School Corp Lake 8,013 934 11.7 49 176 2.2 97 907 11.3 258 1,840 23.0 273City of East Chicago School District Lake 5,042 2,415 47.9 5 711 14.1 16 886 17.6 61 4,666 92.5 1Lake Station Community Schools Lake 1,488 527 35.4 8 110 7.4 35 177 11.9 242 1,177 79.1 5Gary Community School Corp Lake 8,594 139 1.6 233 12 0.1 244 1,328 15.5 118 5,554 64.6 33Griffith Public Schools Lake 2,402 545 22.7 19 41 1.7 111 297 12.4 226 1,183 49.3 111Hammond School City Lake 13,528 6,532 48.3 4 2,117 15.6 11 1,806 13.4 191 11,209 82.9 2Highland School Town Lake 3,240 850 26.2 13 98 3.0 75 278 8.6 286 1,136 35.1 224Hobart School City Lake 4,074 890 21.8 21 111 2.7 83 468 11.5 254 1,801 44.2 152Munster School Town Lake 4,121 825 20.0 25 122 3.0 78 522 12.7 219 747 18.1 282Whiting School City Lake 1,159 708 61.1 1 163 14.1 17 144 12.4 224 749 64.6 34New Prairie United School Corp St. Joseph 2,892 280 9.7 59 93 3.2 69 373 12.9 212 1,103 38.1 203New Durham Township Metropolitan SchoolDistrict LaPorte 904 43 4.8 109 2 0.2 228 107 11.8 244 336 37.2 212

Tri-Township Consolidated School Corp LaPorte 361 12 3.3 148 9 2.5 87 48 13.3 193 135 37.4 210Michigan City Area Schools LaPorte 5,938 465 7.8 74 115 1.9 109 905 15.2 123 4,459 75.1 11South Central Community School Corp LaPorte 943 44 4.7 111 10 1.1 139 113 12.0 239 266 28.2 254La Porte Community School Corp LaPorte 6,767 938 13.9 38 317 4.7 53 981 14.5 148 3,309 48.9 117North Lawrence Community Schools Lawrence 5,174 111 2.1 198 18 0.3 211 988 19.1 36 2,577 49.8 108Mitchell Community Schools Lawrence 1,712 32 1.9 219 6 0.4 210 312 18.2 49 883 51.6 99Frankton-Lapel Community Schools Madison 3,008 62 2.1 205 16 0.5 186 354 11.8 245 1,078 35.8 219South Madison Community School Corp Madison 4,542 73 1.6 235 33 0.7 168 714 15.7 108 1,474 32.5 234Alexandria Community School Corp Madison 1,565 131 8.4 69 16 1.0 142 223 14.2 156 841 53.7 84Anderson Community School Corp Madison 7,062 776 11.0 55 394 5.6 47 1,531 21.7 11 5,520 78.2 6Elwood Community School Corp Madison 1,635 113 6.9 84 40 2.4 89 265 16.2 98 1,086 66.4 28Decatur Township Metropolitan School District Marion 6,125 560 9.1 65 308 5.0 50 759 12.4 225 3,971 64.8 32Franklin Township Community School Corp Marion 8,645 607 7.0 82 305 3.5 66 1,339 15.5 114 3,280 37.9 206Lawrence Township Metropolitan School District Marion 14,871 2,788 18.7 27 1,812 12.2 23 1,823 12.3 228 9,135 61.4 43Perry Township Metropolitan School District Marion 14,718 2,010 13.7 39 2,908 19.8 6 1,710 11.6 250 8,922 60.6 48Pike Township Metropolitan School District Marion 11,069 2,283 20.6 24 1,869 16.9 10 1,504 13.6 181 7,105 64.2 35Warren Township Metropolitan School District Marion 12,132 1,402 11.6 50 866 7.1 36 1,948 16.1 104 8,734 72.0 17Washington Township Metropolitan SchoolDistrict Marion 11,161 1,851 16.6 31 1,625 14.6 13 1,605 14.4 151 6,625 59.4 53

Wayne Township Metropolitan School District Marion 15,925 3,646 22.9 18 2,471 15.5 12 1,948 12.2 229 12,336 77.5 7Beech Grove City Schools Marion 2,878 177 6.2 89 79 2.7 82 452 15.7 109 1,944 67.5 26Indianapolis Public Schools Marion 30,813 6,745 21.9 20 4,454 14.5 15 5,813 18.9 38 25,279 82.0 3Speedway School Town Marion 1,670 226 13.5 40 178 10.7 27 257 15.4 120 934 55.9 67Culver Community Schools Corp Marshall 881 51 5.8 95 8 0.9 151 119 13.5 185 495 56.2 65Argos Community Schools Marshall 614 24 3.9 132 7 1.1 134 74 12.1 233 284 46.3 141Bremen Public Schools Marshall 1,477 342 23.2 17 190 12.9 21 164 11.1 261 585 39.6 192Plymouth Community School Corp Marshall 3,750 804 21.4 22 408 10.9 26 441 11.8 246 2,114 56.4 63Triton School Corp Marshall 964 49 5.1 103 31 3.2 69 73 7.6 289 411 42.6 169Shoals Community School Corp Martin 594 7 1.2 258 1 0.2 238 136 22.9 6 374 63.0 37Loogootee Community School Corp Martin 942 9 1.0 270 1 0.1 253 171 18.2 52 375 39.8 189Maconaquah School Corp Miami 2,266 63 2.8 165 24 1.1 140 312 13.8 172 1,245 54.9 75

40




Totalenroll-ment

Hispanicstudents

%Hispanic

Corp.rank

(on %)

Englishlearner

students % EL

Corp.rank

(on %)


%Special

education

Corp.rank

(on %)


price meals

% Freeand

reduced

Corp.rank

(on %)

North Miami Community Schools Miami 998 18 1.8 222 10 1.0 144 166 16.6 79 387 38.8 197Oak Hill United School Corp Miami 1,648 52 3.2 154 14 0.8 155 200 12.1 231 627 38.0 205Peru Community Schools Miami 2,169 60 2.8 166 18 0.8 156 317 14.6 141 1,357 62.6 39Richland-Bean Blossom Community SchoolCorp Monroe 2,823 87 3.1 156 7 0.2 226 515 18.2 48 1,001 35.5 221

Monroe County Community School Corp Monroe 10,884 515 4.7 110 330 3.0 74 1,585 14.6 144 4,047 37.2 211North Montgomery Community School Corp Montgomery 1,952 62 3.2 152 30 1.5 118 326 16.7 78 734 37.6 208South Montgomery Community School Corp Montgomery 1,710 45 2.6 174 1 0.1 264 291 17.0 73 663 38.8 198Crawfordsville Community Schools Montgomery 2,472 380 15.4 34 198 8.0 32 500 20.2 18 1,542 62.4 40Monroe-Gregg School District Morgan 1,507 44 2.9 162 2 0.1 245 198 13.1 201 544 36.1 218Eminence Community School Corp Morgan 402 3 0.7 275 1 0.2 225 74 18.4 45 170 42.3 173Martinsville Schools Metropolitan SchoolDistrict Morgan 5,093 88 1.7 227 9 0.2 236 872 17.1 71 2,583 50.7 102

Mooresville Consolidated School Corp Morgan 4,607 100 2.2 196 21 0.5 195 581 12.6 220 1,836 39.9 187North Newton School Corp Newton 1,439 105 7.3 79 32 2.2 96 202 14.0 165 682 47.4 130South Newton School Corp Newton 891 104 11.7 48 46 5.2 49 145 16.3 93 520 58.4 56Central Noble Community School Corp Noble 1,267 33 2.6 176 8 0.6 174 204 16.1 101 543 42.9 165East Noble School Corp Noble 3,788 252 6.7 87 128 3.4 67 676 17.8 57 1,784 47.1 134West Noble School Corp Noble 2,480 1,215 49.0 2 780 31.5 1 263 10.6 270 1,715 69.2 21Rising Sun-Ohio County Community Schools Ohio 843 9 1.1 264 0 0.0 266 115 13.6 178 329 39.0 194Orleans Community Schools Orange 857 3 0.4 286 1 0.1 248 155 18.1 53 451 52.6 91Paoli Community School Corp Orange 1,569 23 1.5 245 0 0.0 266 243 15.5 115 868 55.3 70Springs Valley Community School Corp Orange 917 26 2.8 164 11 1.2 131 152 16.6 82 455 49.6 109Spencer-Owen Community Schools Owen 2,727 30 1.1 260 6 0.2 229 579 21.2 13 1,447 53.1 86Southwest Parke Community School Corp Parke 989 34 3.4 143 1 0.1 254 197 19.9 21 603 61.0 45Perry Central Community School Corp Perry 1,193 13 1.1 262 0 0.0 266 155 13.0 207 451 37.8 207Cannelton City Schools Perry 247 5 2.0 209 0 0.0 266 62 25.1 1 185 74.9 13Tell City-Troy Township School Corp Perry 1,496 41 2.7 168 12 0.8 161 195 13.0 203 707 47.3 132North Central Parke Community School Corp Parke 1,215 18 1.5 243 0 0.0 266 269 22.1 10 625 51.4 100Pike County School Corp Pike 1,951 17 0.9 273 8 0.4 203 417 21.4 12 876 44.9 149Boone Township Metropolitan School District Porter 1,182 139 11.8 47 4 0.3 213 154 13.0 204 370 31.3 238Duneland School Corp Porter 5,901 555 9.4 61 44 0.7 166 924 15.7 110 1,607 27.2 257East Porter County School Corp Porter 2,459 145 5.9 91 19 0.8 164 326 13.3 195 493 20.0 278Porter Township School Corp Porter 1,481 191 12.9 41 23 1.6 117 238 16.1 102 335 22.6 274Union Township School Corp Porter 1,534 185 12.1 45 6 0.4 206 252 16.4 88 322 21.0 276Portage Township Schools Porter 7,951 1,681 21.1 23 185 2.3 92 1,231 15.5 116 4,334 54.5 78Valparaiso Community Schools Porter 6,403 597 9.3 64 181 2.8 80 818 12.8 214 1,861 29.1 250Mount Vernon Community School Corp Posey 2,187 47 2.1 197 6 0.3 223 461 21.1 14 806 36.9 215North Posey County Metropolitan SchoolDistrict Posey 1,414 23 1.6 232 1 0.1 262 272 19.2 32 417 29.5 247

Eastern Pulaski Community School Corp Pulaski 1,272 52 4.1 127 4 0.3 217 175 13.8 173 530 41.7 176West Central School Corp Pulaski 856 50 5.8 93 17 2.0 104 157 18.3 46 449 52.5 93South Putnam Community Schools Putnam 1,147 19 1.7 230 1 0.1 257 170 14.8 137 504 43.9 154North Putnam Community Schools Putnam 1,572 15 1.0 271 1 0.1 263 273 17.4 66 678 43.1 161Cloverdale Community Schools Putnam 1,228 22 1.8 224 0 0.0 266 228 18.6 42 737 60.0 51Greencastle Community School Corp Putnam 2,047 53 2.6 178 15 0.7 167 334 16.3 92 1,004 49.0 115Union School Corp Randolph 371 5 1.3 247 3 0.8 160 73 19.7 26 205 55.3 71Randolph Southern School Corp Randolph 501 19 3.8 135 7 1.4 124 77 15.4 121 246 49.1 114Monroe Central School Corp Randolph 986 20 2.0 208 0 0.0 266 172 17.4 64 536 54.4 79

41




Totalenroll-ment

Hispanicstudents

%Hispanic

Corp.rank

(on %)

Englishlearner

students % EL

Corp.rank

(on %)


%Special

education

Corp.rank

(on %)


price meals

% Freeand

reduced

Corp.rank

(on %)

Randolph Central School Corp Randolph 1,541 33 2.1 199 7 0.5 196 274 17.8 58 876 56.8 61Randolph Eastern School Corp Randolph 914 162 17.7 30 60 6.6 38 130 14.2 159 595 65.1 31South Ripley Community School Corp Ripley 1,165 6 0.5 282 1 0.1 258 184 15.8 106 625 53.6 85Batesville Community School Corp Ripley 2,174 104 4.8 108 49 2.3 95 246 11.3 259 572 26.3 260Jac-Cen-Del Community School Corp Ripley 876 2 0.2 289 5 0.6 181 143 16.3 91 374 42.7 167Milan Community Schools Ripley 1,175 4 0.3 287 1 0.1 259 191 16.3 95 511 43.5 158Rush County Schools Rush 2,488 40 1.6 234 22 0.9 153 324 13.0 205 1,188 47.7 127John Glenn School Corp St. Joseph 1,871 101 5.4 99 19 1.0 143 203 10.8 268 797 42.6 170Penn-Harris-Madison School Corp St. Joseph 10,334 481 4.7 112 253 2.4 88 1,239 12.0 237 2,913 28.2 256Mishawaka School City St. Joseph 5,179 357 6.9 85 78 1.5 121 898 17.3 67 3,402 65.7 30South Bend Community School Corp St. Joseph 19,680 3,654 18.6 29 2,236 11.4 24 3,723 18.9 37 14,358 73.0 15Union-North United School Corp St. Joseph 1,142 59 5.2 101 11 1.0 147 124 10.9 266 561 49.1 113Scott County School District 1 Scott 1,259 28 2.2 193 7 0.6 183 254 20.2 19 899 71.4 18Scott County School District 2 Scott 2,705 71 2.6 175 8 0.3 220 412 15.2 124 1,370 50.6 103Shelby Eastern Schools Shelby 1,319 27 2.0 207 8 0.6 178 204 15.5 117 460 34.9 226Northwestern Consolidated School Corp Shelby 1,445 30 2.1 203 8 0.6 184 187 12.9 211 506 35.0 225Southwestern Shelby County ConsolidatedSchools Shelby 616 17 2.8 167 0 0.0 266 90 14.6 142 235 38.1 201

Shelbyville Central Schools Shelby 4,049 456 11.3 52 259 6.4 41 664 16.4 90 2,199 54.3 80North Spencer County School Corp Spencer 2,000 147 7.4 78 78 3.9 61 301 15.1 130 578 28.9 251South Spencer County School Corp Spencer 1,336 59 4.4 118 6 0.4 197 207 15.5 113 606 45.4 146Oregon-Davis School Corp Starke 596 25 4.2 124 2 0.3 214 63 10.6 272 334 56.0 66North Judson-San Pierre School Corp Starke 1,197 79 6.6 88 14 1.2 132 174 14.5 146 612 51.1 101Knox Community School Corp Starke 1,967 81 4.1 126 28 1.4 123 206 10.5 274 1,220 62.0 42Fremont Community Schools Steuben 968 24 2.5 186 4 0.4 202 113 11.7 248 324 33.5 229Hamilton Community Schools Steuben 426 2 0.5 283 4 0.9 149 83 19.5 28 171 40.1 184Steuben County Metropolitan School District Steuben 3,013 258 8.6 67 123 4.1 60 438 14.5 145 1,405 46.6 136Northeast School Corp Sullivan 1,274 20 1.6 238 0 0.0 266 153 12.0 235 672 52.7 90Southwest School Corp Sullivan 1,769 53 3.0 161 2 0.1 250 234 13.2 197 860 48.6 122Switzerland County School Corp Switzerland 1,502 27 1.8 223 13 0.9 154 273 18.2 51 863 57.5 60Lafayette School Corp Tippecanoe 7,284 1,805 24.8 15 1,060 14.6 14 1,205 16.5 83 5,110 70.2 20Tippecanoe School Corp Tippecanoe 12,259 1,548 12.6 42 787 6.4 39 1,620 13.2 198 4,505 36.7 216West Lafayette Community School Corp Tippecanoe 2,247 132 5.9 92 144 6.4 40 204 9.1 284 326 14.5 286Tipton County Northern Community SchoolCorp Tipton 856 47 5.5 97 24 2.8 81 159 18.6 41 335 39.1 193

Tipton Community School Corp Tipton 1,732 59 3.4 146 10 0.6 180 236 13.6 180 673 38.9 195Union County-College Corner Joint SchoolDistrict Union 1,469 16 1.1 263 7 0.5 193 232 15.8 107 720 49.0 116

Evansville-Vanderburgh School Corp Vanderburgh 22,688 833 3.7 137 478 2.1 100 3,728 16.4 87 13,486 59.4 52North Vermillion Community School Corp Vermillion 736 14 1.9 217 0 0.0 266 104 14.1 162 358 48.6 120South Vermillion Community School Corp Vermillion 1,812 28 1.5 240 2 0.1 251 332 18.3 47 899 49.6 110Vigo County School Corp Vigo 15,573 474 3.0 160 211 1.4 126 3,115 20.0 20 8,670 55.7 68Manchester Community Schools Wabash 1,656 81 4.9 107 50 3.0 76 210 12.7 217 835 50.4 105Wabash County Metropolitan School District Wabash 2,165 45 2.1 201 9 0.4 201 324 15.0 132 862 39.8 188Wabash City Schools Wabash 1,472 23 1.6 239 5 0.3 212 243 16.5 84 890 60.5 49Warren County Metropolitan School District Warren 1,135 18 1.6 236 0 0.0 266 225 19.8 23 484 42.6 168Warrick County School Corp Warrick 9,992 239 2.4 190 99 1.0 146 1,910 19.1 35 3,152 31.5 236Salem Community Schools Washington 1,960 29 1.5 244 5 0.3 224 444 22.7 7 1,038 53.0 89East Washington School Corp Washington 1,545 26 1.7 229 6 0.4 207 254 16.4 86 779 50.4 106

42


Source: Indiana Department of Education

Note:English Learner (EL) or English Language Learner (ELL) refers to any student who may or may not be in the ENL program but those who are continuing to acquire theEnglish language.


Totalenroll-ment

Hispanicstudents

%Hispanic

Corp.rank

(on %)

Englishlearner

students % EL

Corp.rank

(on %)


%Special

education

Corp.rank

(on %)


price meals

% Freeand

reduced

Corp.rank

(on %)

West Washington School Corp Washington 843 10 1.2 257 0 0.0 266 152 18.0 54 465 55.2 72Nettle Creek School Corp Wayne 1,126 11 1.0 269 2 0.2 235 193 17.1 70 490 43.5 157Western Wayne Schools Wayne 1,032 13 1.3 254 2 0.2 233 155 15.0 131 605 58.6 54Centerville-Abington Community Schools Wayne 1,776 25 1.4 246 10 0.6 182 184 10.4 275 732 41.2 180Northeastern Wayne Schools Wayne 1,261 16 1.3 253 2 0.2 240 187 14.8 136 503 39.9 186Richmond Community School Corp Wayne 5,304 360 6.8 86 231 4.4 55 1,105 20.8 16 4,006 75.5 10Southern Wells Community Schools Wells 854 4 0.5 284 7 0.8 159 109 12.8 215 282 33.0 231Northern Wells Community Schools Wells 2,412 57 2.4 192 25 1.0 141 367 15.2 126 733 30.4 244Bluffton-Harrison Metropolitan School District Wells 1,477 86 5.8 94 29 2.0 107 205 13.9 169 705 47.7 128North White School Corp White 852 251 29.5 11 161 18.9 7 120 14.1 163 587 68.9 24Frontier School Corp White 719 17 2.4 191 2 0.3 222 131 18.2 50 204 28.4 253Tri-County School Corp White 758 24 3.2 153 6 0.8 162 128 16.9 77 301 39.7 190Twin Lakes School Corp White 2,449 272 11.1 53 148 6.0 45 294 12.0 236 1,191 48.6 121Smith-Green Community Schools Whitley 1,192 16 1.3 248 1 0.1 260 130 10.9 264 339 28.4 252Whitley County Consolidated Schools Whitley 3,607 133 3.7 136 19 0.5 188 492 13.6 179 1,172 32.5 232

43

Appendix B. Survey of Organizations Serving the Indiana Latino Community

58

Appendix C. Participating Indiana Latino-Serving OrganizationsName of organization County100 Black Men of Indianapolis, Inc. MarionAbout Special Kids Statewide agencyAmigos of Mexicans in Indiana Generating

OpportunitiesMarion

AMIGOS, the Richmond Latino Center WayneAquinas Center for Continuing Religious Education ClarkAutism Society of Indiana Statewide agencyBartholomew Consolidated School Corporation BartholomewBauer Family Resources TippecanoeButler University Center for Citizenship and

CommunityMarion

Catholic Charities Diocese of Evansville VanderburghCenter for Legal Justice ElkhartCenter for Nonviolence AllenChild Care Network, Inc. JacksonChristamore House MarionChristian Fellowship Church of Evansville, Indiana VanderburghCity of Bloomington, Latino Programs and Outreach

DivisionMonroe

City of Lawrence MarionClinton County Family YMCA ClintonColumbus Regional Health (Reach Healthy

Communities/Proyecto Salud)Bartholomew

Common Grace Ministries, Inc. NobleConcord Neighborhood Center MarionCTS Counseling Ctr./ Center for Interfaith

CooperationMarion

Drug Free Noble County, Inc. NobleEducational Opportunity Center AllenEl Campito Child Development Center St. JosephEl Centro Comunal Latino MonroeEl Informador Latino VanderburghEl Lirio de los Valles MarionElkhart Youth and Community Center ElkhartEn La Mira Radio Show MarionEskenazi Patient Navigations MarionEvansville Christian Life Center VanderburghFamily Voices Indiana MarionFort Wayne Community Schools AllenGirl Scouts of Central Indiana Statewide agencyGoodwill Educational Initiatives Statewide agencyGoodwill Industries of Michiana, Inc. St. JosephGoshen College ElkhartHealthVisions Midwest LakeHispanic Connection of Southern Indiana ClarkHoly Spirit Catholic Church and School MarionImmigrant Connection at The Bridge CassImmigrant Welcome Center MarionIndiana Commission on Hispanic/Latino Affairs MarionIndiana Department of Education Migrant Education

ProgramBartholomew

Indiana Health Centers, Inc. HowardIndiana Latino Expo Inc. MarionIndiana State Department of Health Office of

Minority HealthMarion

Indiana Undocumented Youth Alliance Statewide agencyIndiana University - Office of the Vice President andGeneral Counsel

Marion

Indiana Youth Institute Statewide agencyIndianapolis First Hispanic Church of The Nazarene MarionIndianapolis Neighborhood Resource Center (INRC) MarionIndy Reads MarionInternational Institute/LACASA LakeIU Health Bloomington Hospital Positive Link MonroeIU School of Social Work MarionIUPUI - Admissions MarionIUPUI - Community Relations MarionIvy Tech Community College - Indianapolis Statewide agencyIvy Tech Community College - Northwest Statewide agencyIvy Tech Community College Lafayette TippecanoeJackson County United Way Jackson

Name of organization CountyJuan Garza/Fuerza Latina VanderburghLa Casa Amiga JeffersonLa Casa de Amistad St. JosephLa Plaza MarionLa Voz de Indiana MarionLaCasa, Inc. ElkhartLatin Media LakeLatino Affairs Department at the Indianapolis

Mayor's OfficeMarion

Latino Center for Wellness and Education TippecanoeLatino Coalition Against Domestic & Sexual Violence MarionLatino Student Union DelawareLatino Youth Collective MarionLEAP of Noble County NobleLearning Network of Clinton County/Purdue

ExtensionClinton

Legacy Foundation LakeLife and Family Services NobleLutheran Social Services AllenMarion County Prosecutor's Office MarionMeals on Wheels of Tippecanoe County TippecanoeMemorial Hospital St. JosephMigrant Education Program Statewide agencyMigrant Education Resource Center Region 6 AdamsMinority Health Coalition of Grant County GrantMonroe County YMCA MonroeMosaicos Indianapolis, Inc. MarionMount Pleasant Christian Church JohnsonMSD of Wayne Township MarionMSD Warren Township Schools MarionNational Immigrant Justice Center - Goshen Office ElkhartNativity Catholic Church - Centro Juan Diego VanderburghNew Albany Deanery Catholic Youth Ministries FloydNoble House Ministries Inc NobleNorthern Indiana Hispanic Health Coalition ElkhartOffice of Hispanic Ministry - Catholic Diocese of

EvansvilleVanderburgh

Office of Hispanic Ministry Diocese of Evansville VanderburghOffice of U.S. Representative Andre Carson MarionPathStone Corp. DelawarePerry Township Schools MarionPike High School MarionPortage Township Emergency Food Pantry PorterProject Stepping Stone of Indiana MarionPurdue Cooperative Extension Service MarionPurdue University Latino Cultural Center TippecanoeRichmond Family YMCA WayneRiggs Community Health Center TippecanoeSaint Adalbert Parish St. JosephSaint John the Evangelist Catholic Church ElkhartShepherd Community, Inc. MarionSociety for the Advancement of Chicano/Latinos and

Native Americans in ScienceMonroe

Southeast Community Services MarionSouthern Indiana Hispanic Services, Inc. JacksonSt. Joseph County Health Department St. JosephSt. Margaret's House St. JosephSt. Paul Lutheran Church, Columbus, Indiana BartholomewStarfish Initiative MarionTeach For America MarionThe Diversity & Inclusion Institute For Change VanderburghThe Mind Trust MarionTobacco Prevention and Cessation Commission Statewide agencyTri-County YMCA DuboisUnited Way of Cass County CassUnited Way of Central Indiana MarionViridis Centro de Nutricion MarionWarren Central High School MarionWells County (Indiana) Republican Party WellsWhite River Christian Church Hamilton

A research partnership between the Indiana Latino Institute and the Indiana University Public Policy Institute Thank you to Lilly Endowment Inc. and the Marion County Public Health Departmentfor the generous support of this project.

March 2016 • ISSUE 15-C35

© 2016 Indiana University Public Policy Institute School of Public and Environmental AffairsIndiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis334 N. Senate, Suite 300Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

yeceniatostado

Typewritten Text

yeceniatostado

Typewritten Text

yeceniatostado

Typewritten Text

yeceniatostado

Typewritten Text

yeceniatostado

Typewritten Text

yeceniatostado

Typewritten Text

A research partnership between the Indiana Latino...

Documents

Transcript of A research partnership between the Indiana Latino...