Additional Indicators DRAFT 20091214

8/14/2019 Additional Indicators DRAFT 20091214

1/270

Tab Areas Charts

HotSpots_DisplayAll 1

2

3

4

5

CHIS_Display California, Alameda, Fres 1

2

CHKS_Display Alameda, Fresno 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


2/270

9

10

11

CDE_Display California, Alameda, Fres 1

2

3

4


3/270

Display

Population (10-19) by Race/Ethnicity 2008*

Chlamydia, Cases and Rates for Females (1524) 2007

Teen Births (15-19) per 1,000 (Female Population 15-19) 2006*

Juvenile Arrests 2007*

--Juvenile Felony Arrests--Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests

Self-Inflicted Injuries 2004-2006*

--Nonfatal Hospitalized

--Fatal

*No data for non-county LHJs

Substance Use

--Have never tried drugs

--Did not engage in binge drinking during the past monthTobacco Use

--Did not smoke in past 30 days

--Never smoked regularly

Teen Dating Violence (%)

Verbal Harassment on School Property, Past 12 Months (%)

--Had mean rumors/lies spread about you

--Had sexual jokes/comments/gestures made to you

--Been made fun of because of your looks/way talk

Physical Violence on School Property, Past 12 Months (%)

--Been pushed, shoved, hit, etc.

--Been afraid of being beaten up

--Been in physical fight

Reason for Harassment on School Property, Past 12 Months (%)

--Race, Ethnicity, or National Origin

--Gender

--Sexual Orientation

--Physical/Mental Disability

--Any Other Reason

Weapons Possession on School Property, Past 12 Months (%)

--Carried a gun

--Carried any other weapon

Frequency of Sad and Hopeless Feelings, Past 12 Months (%)

Resiliency in School Environment: Total Assets (%)

Resiliency in School Environment (%)

--Caring Relationships: Adult in School

--High Expectations: Adult in School


4/270

--Meaningful Participation

Resiliency in Community Environment: Total Assets (%)

Resiliency in Community Environment (%)

--Caring Relationships: Adult in Community

--High Expectations: Adult in Community

--Meaningful ParticipationSchool Connectedness Scale (%)

High School Dropouts, Graduates, and Graduation Rate 2007-08

Graduates with UC/CSU Required Courses 2007-2008

Graduates with UC/CSU Required Courses 2007-08, By Gender

Graduates with UC/CSU Required Courses 2007-08, By Race/Ethnicity


5/270

Area 1: Alameda

Area 2: California

Population (10-19) by Race/Ethnicity 2008

Alameda n %

Black 27,155 13.6%

White 54,168 27.1%

Hispanic 60,939 30.5%

Asian / P.I. 46,565 23.3%Native American 1,029 0.5%

Multirace 9,717 4.9%

Total 199,573 100.0%

Chlamydia, Cases and Rates for Females (1524) 2007

Chlamydia, Females (1524)

Cases

Alameda 3,656 38.1

California 70,216 25.7

Guide

Rate per1,000

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

25 0

30.0

35.0

40.038.1

Chlamydia, Females Ages 1524


6/270

1 2 3

Local Health Jurisdiction Overall rank

California N.A. N.A.

Alameda 26 29

Alameda--Berkeley City N.A. N.A.

Alpine N.A. N.A.

Amador N.A. N.A.

Butte 26 28

Calaveras N.A. N.A.

Colusa N.A. N.A.

Contra Costa 32 34

Del Norte N.A. N.A.

El Dorado 38 41

Fresno 17 6

Glenn N.A. N.A.

Humboldt 26 27

Imperial 18 8

Inyo N.A. N.A.

Kern 17 5

Kings 18 7

Lake 21 16

Lassen N.A. N.A.

Los Angeles 23 21

Los Angeles--Long Beach N.A. N.A.

Los Angeles--Pasadena Cit N.A. N.A.

Madera 20 11

Marin 35 37

Mean of ranksNeed rank for all variables tobe averaged


7/270

Mariposa N.A. N.A.

Mendocino 23 19

Merced 15 3

Modoc N.A. N.A.

Mono N.A. N.A.

Monterey 20 10Napa 31 33

Nevada 35 38

Orange 31 32

Placer 36 39

Plumas N.A. N.A.

Riverside 24 22

Sacramento 20 11

San Benito 21 16

San Bernardino 16 4

San Diego 25 25San Francisco 21 13

San Joaquin 14 2

San Luis Obispo 38 40

San Mateo 34 36

Santa Barbara 24 23

Santa Clara 29 31

Santa Cruz 21 15

Shasta 23 20

Sierra N.A. N.A.

Siskiyou N.A. N.A.

Solano 25 24

Sonoma 29 30

Stanislaus 19 9

Sutter 21 14

Tehama N.A. N.A.

Trinity N.A. N.A.

Tulare 11 1

Tuolumne N.A. N.A.

Ventura 25 25

Yolo 33 35

Yuba 22 18

Missing N.A. N.A.

41

Source Name

Source Date


8/270

Source Home Page

Data URL

Date Accessed

Recommended Citation

Page Notes

Methods URL

Methods


9/270


10/270


11/270

2,180 53 10 0.5% 49

12,132 39 74 0.6% 47

45,937 23 1,035 2.3% 23

1,484 56 2 0.1% 56

1,808 55 0 0.0% 57

63,452 19 1,030 1.6% 2819,432 34 220 1.1% 37

13,473 37 52 0.4% 51

454,672 3 6,698 1.5% 32

51,670 22 316 0.6% 46

2,662 51 31 1.2% 36

367,866 4 27,855 7.6% 9

219,600 7 25,195 11.5% 5

10,339 40 94 0.9% 40

365,829 5 42,387 11.6% 4

462,729 2 21,656 4.7% 1351,894 21 6,475 12.5% 3

125,342 12 9,710 7.7% 8

37,297 24 564 1.5% 31

87,309 15 3,337 3.8% 15

62,550 20 1,749 2.8% 19

244,005 6 6,241 2.6% 22

33,710 25 360 1.1% 39

27,061 31 232 0.9% 43

442 57 4 0.9% 41

5,967 44 79 1.3% 35

64,844 18 8,125 12.5% 2

67,524 17 1,251 1.9% 26

94,618 14 2,928 3.1% 17

15,886 36 247 1.6% 30

9,423 41 53 0.6% 48

1,962 54 4 0.2% 55

77,092 16 834 1.1% 38

6,619 43 42 0.6% 45

124,650 13 1,944 1.6% 29

32,996 26 1,080 3.3% 16

13,205 38 346 2.6% 21

N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

California Department of Finance po California Department of Finance population projection

Based on 2000 census Based on 2000 census


12/270

1/4/2009 1/4/2009

Based on an unduplicated count of eBased on an unduplicated count of entries during time

Data Source: CWS/CMS 2008 2 ExtraData Source: CWS/CMS 2008 2 Extract.

Population Data Source: California D Population Data Source: California Department of Fina

Program version: 1.10 Database ver Program version: 1.10 Database version: 5C0FD1AA

Methodology Methodology

http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwehttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/default.aspx

http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwehttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/InCareRates.

Needell, B., Webster, D., Armijo, M., Needell, B., Webster, D., Armijo, M., Lee, S., Dawson,

http://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsrepohttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsreports/methodologies
http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/default.aspxhttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/InCareRates.aspxhttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsreports/methodologies/default.aspx?report=InCareRateshttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsreports/methodologies/default.aspx?report=InCareRateshttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsreports/methodologies/default.aspx?report=InCareRateshttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/InCareRates.aspxhttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/InCareRates.aspxhttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/default.aspxhttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/default.aspx


13/270

In Care Rates (Point In Time) In Care Rates (Point In Time)

These reports compute annual In CaThese reports compute annual In Care Rates based on

The statewide In Care Rate for a givThe statewide In Care Rate for a given year is compute

This rate looks at only those childrenThis rate looks at only those children with an open cas

Children with missing county assign Children with missing county assignment are included iIn Care Rates are based on children In Care Rates are based on children under the age of 1

Cells containing a period (".") repres Cells containing a period (".") represent a value of zero

In Care Rate data are also available In Care Rate data are also available broken out by age,


14/270

9 10 11 12 13

1,948,143 33.5% N.A. N.A. 2,695,205

54,168 27.1% 52 7 60,939


71 53.0% 26 33 29

3,780 74.9% 12 47 812

23,639 72.1% 16 43 5,599

4,565 78.2% 10 49 868

1,312 35.3% 44 15 2,222

69,370 45.5% 33 26 44,343

2,680 66.7% 19 40 629

22,300 81.5% 6 53 3,823

40,128 25.5% 54 5 87,424

2,401 49.9% 28 31 1,953

13,035 74.2% 13 46 1,820

3,183 11.0% 58 1 23,653

1,616 63.4% 21 38 518

53,166 37.6% 43 16 71,914

8,767 34.9% 45 14 13,605

5,718 69.7% 17 42 1,693

3,717 76.5% 11 48 679

308,113 18.7% 55 4 1,004,704



9,715 38.0% 41 18 14,476

19,016 63.2% 22 37 7,915

2008 WhitePopulation (10-19)

2008 WhitePopulation (10-19) as percent of2008 TotalPopulation (10-

19)

Rank of 2008White Population(10-19) aspercent of 2008

Total Population

(10-19)

Rank of 2008Non-WhitePopulation (10-19) as percent of2008 Total

Population (10-19)

2008 HispanicPopulation (10-19)


15/270

1,769 81.1% 7 52 215

7,105 58.6% 23 36 3,568

12,111 26.4% 53 6 28,442

1,166 78.6% 9 50 210

1,013 56.0% 25 34 699

11,180 17.6% 56 3 45,4329,275 47.7% 29 30 8,645

11,747 87.2% 1 58 1,158

172,069 37.8% 42 17 198,092

37,888 73.3% 14 45 9,281

2,178 81.8% 5 54 270

141,149 38.4% 39 20 175,054

94,833 43.2% 36 23 54,364

3,298 31.9% 48 11 6,446

102,352 28.0% 50 9 193,552

219,527 47.4% 30 29 163,7246,701 12.9% 57 2 12,015

38,109 30.4% 49 10 53,118

23,681 63.5% 20 39 10,874

30,322 34.7% 46 13 28,844

27,598 44.1% 35 24 29,103

80,330 32.9% 47 12 85,039

14,459 42.9% 37 22 16,013

21,842 80.7% 8 51 2,263

363 82.1% 4 55 51

4,347 72.9% 15 44 865

25,229 38.9% 38 21 17,283

38,422 56.9% 24 35 21,943

36,131 38.2% 40 19 48,573

7,212 45.4% 34 25 6,184

6,315 67.0% 18 41 2,544

1,632 83.2% 2 57 106

21,510 27.9% 51 8 50,713

5,454 82.4% 3 56 745

57,031 45.8% 32 27 55,128

15,402 46.7% 31 28 11,075

6,933 52.5% 27 32 3,956


California Department of Finance population projections on the Child WelfCalifornia Depart

Based on 2000 census Based on 2000 ce


16/270

1/4/2009 1/4/2009

Based on an unduplicated count of entries during time period. Based on an undu

Data Source: CWS/CMS 2008 2 Extract. Data Source: CWS

Population Data Source: California Department of Finance annual populatPopulation Data S

Program version: 1.10 Database version: 5C0FD1AA Program version:


http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/default.aspx http://cssr.berkele

http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/InCareRates.aspx http://cssr.berkele

Needell, B., Webster, D., Armijo, M., Lee, S., Dawson, W., Magruder, J., ExNeedell, B., Webst

http://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsreports/methodologies/default.aspx?repohttp://cssr.berkele


17/270

In Care Rates (Point In Time) In Care Rates (Poi

These reports compute annual In Care Rates based on population projectiThese reports com

The statewide In Care Rate for a given year is computed by dividing the PThe statewide In

This rate looks at only those children with an open case or referral under This rate looks at

Children with missing county assignment are included in the statewide caChildren with missIn Care Rates are based on children under the age of 18, therefore they dIn Care Rates are

Cells containing a period (".") represent a value of zero. In cells representCells containing a

In Care Rate data are also available broken out by age, ethnicity, and ge In Care Rate data


18/270

14 15 16 17 18

46.4% N.A. 581,000 10.0% N.A.

30.5% 29 46,565 23.3% 4


21.6% 39 0 0.0% 58

16.1% 44 34 0.7% 52

17.1% 43 1,325 4.0% 25

14.9% 46 46 0.8% 48

59.8% 7 70 1.9% 39

29.1% 33 18,042 11.8% 10

15.7% 45 161 4.0% 27

14.0% 49 452 1.7% 40

55.5% 9 17,655 11.2% 12

40.6% 21 248 5.2% 18

10.4% 53 377 2.1% 38

82.1% 1 698 2.4% 35

20.3% 41 32 1.3% 42

50.9% 13 4,956 3.5% 29

54.2% 10 604 2.4% 36

20.7% 40 61 0.7% 50

14.0% 50 48 1.0% 44

60.9% 6 151,037 9.2% 13



56.6% 8 209 0.8% 47

26.3% 36 1,042 3.5% 30

2008 HispanicPopulation (10-19) as percent of2008 TotalPopulation (10-

19)

Rank of 2008HispanicPopulation (10-19) as percent of2008 Total

Population (10-19)

2008 AsianPIPopulation (10-19)

2008 AsianPIPopulation (10-19) as percent of2008 TotalPopulation (10-

19)

Rank of 2008AsianPIPopulation (10-19) as percent of2008 Total

Population (10-19)


19/270

9.9% 55 13 0.6% 54

29.4% 31 118 1.0% 45

61.9% 5 3,442 7.5% 16

14.2% 48 6 0.4% 56

38.7% 23 18 1.0% 43

71.6% 2 3,649 5.8% 1744.5% 17 779 4.0% 26

8.6% 56 89 0.7% 53

43.6% 19 63,090 13.9% 7

18.0% 42 2,568 5.0% 21

10.1% 54 11 0.4% 55

47.6% 14 14,496 3.9% 28

24.8% 37 29,912 13.6% 8

62.3% 4 231 2.2% 37

52.9% 11 16,404 4.5% 23

35.4% 24 37,882 8.2% 1423.2% 38 23,525 45.3% 1

42.4% 20 20,344 16.2% 5

29.2% 32 1,108 3.0% 33

33.0% 27 20,609 23.6% 3

46.5% 16 2,158 3.5% 31

34.9% 25 61,952 25.4% 2

47.5% 15 1,693 5.0% 19

8.4% 57 790 2.9% 34

11.5% 51 1 0.2% 57

14.5% 47 84 1.4% 41

26.7% 35 9,168 14.1% 6

32.5% 28 2,976 4.4% 24

51.3% 12 4,536 4.8% 22

38.9% 22 1,869 11.8% 11

27.0% 34 80 0.8% 46

5.4% 58 14 0.7% 51

65.8% 3 2,426 3.1% 32

11.3% 52 50 0.8% 49

44.2% 18 6,226 5.0% 20

33.6% 26 3,970 12.0% 9

30.0% 30 1,051 8.0% 15


ent of Finance population projection California Department of Finance population projection

sus Based on 2000 census


20/270

1/4/2009

plicated count of entries during time Based on an unduplicated count of entries during time

/CMS 2008 2 Extract. Data Source: CWS/CMS 2008 2 Extract.

urce: California Department of Fina Population Data Source: California Department of Fina

.10 Database version: 5C0FD1AA Program version: 1.10 Database version: 5C0FD1AA

Methodology

y.edu/ucb_childwelfare/default.aspx http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/default.aspx

y.edu/ucb_childwelfare/InCareRates. http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/InCareRates.

er, D., Armijo, M., Lee, S., Dawson, Needell, B., Webster, D., Armijo, M., Lee, S., Dawson,

y.edu/cwscmsreports/methodologieshttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsreports/methodologies


21/270

t In Time) In Care Rates (Point In Time)

pute annual In Care Rates based on These reports compute annual In Care Rates based on

are Rate for a given year is computeThe statewide In Care Rate for a given year is compute

nly those children with an open casThis rate looks at only those children with an open cas

ing county assignment are included iChildren with missing county assignment are included ibased on children under the age of 1 In Care Rates are based on children under the age of 1

period (".") represent a value of zeroCells containing a period (".") represent a value of zero

are also available broken out by age, In Care Rate data are also available broken out by age,


22/270

19 20 21 22 23

36,786 0.6% N.A. 161,667 2.8%

1,029 0.5% 45 9,717 4.9%


27 20.1% 1 7 5.2%

76 1.5% 24 117 2.3%

784 2.4% 15 910 2.8%

94 1.6% 22 223 3.8%

58 1.6% 23 41 1.1%

684 0.4% 49 5,154 3.4%

368 9.2% 3 122 3.0%

187 0.7% 37 493 1.8%

1,377 0.9% 31 2,260 1.4%

97 2.0% 19 94 2.0%

1,475 8.4% 4 712 4.1%

495 1.7% 21 158 0.5%

286 11.2% 2 91 3.6%

1,182 0.8% 32 2,070 1.5%

243 1.0% 28 366 1.5%

281 3.4% 11 282 3.4%

160 3.3% 12 129 2.7%

4,526 0.3% 56 33,187 2.0%



371 1.5% 25 455 1.8%

59 0.2% 58 1,213 4.0%

2008 AmericanIndian Population(10-19)

2008 AmericanIndian Population(10-19) aspercent of 2008

Total Population

(10-19)

Rank of 2008American IndianPopulation (10-19) as percent of2008 Total

Population (10-19)

2008 MultiracePopulation (10-19)

2008 MultiracePopulation (10-19) as percent of2008 TotalPopulation (10-

19)


23/270


24/270

1/4/2009 1/4/2009

Based on an unduplicated count of entries during time Based on an unduplicated count of e

Data Source: CWS/CMS 2008 2 Extract. Data Source: CWS/CMS 2008 2 Extra

Population Data Source: California Department of Fina Population Data Source: California D

Program version: 1.10 Database version: 5C0FD1AA Program version: 1.10 Database ver


http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/default.aspx http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwe

http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/InCareRates. http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwe

Needell, B., Webster, D., Armijo, M., Lee, S., Dawson, Needell, B., Webster, D., Armijo, M.,

http://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsreports/methodologieshttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsrepo


25/270

In Care Rates (Point In Time) In Care Rates (Point In Time)

These reports compute annual In Care Rates based on These reports compute annual In Ca

The statewide In Care Rate for a given year is computeThe statewide In Care Rate for a giv

This rate looks at only those children with an open casThis rate looks at only those children

Children with missing county assignment are included iChildren with missing county assignIn Care Rates are based on children under the age of 1 In Care Rates are based on children

Cells containing a period (".") represent a value of zeroCells containing a period (".") repres

In Care Rate data are also available broken out by age, In Care Rate data are also available


26/270


27/270

17 7,061 N.A. N.A. N.A.

40 39,321 7 0.2 22

51 136,066 24 0.2 23

32 4,623 1 0.2 15

44 5,491 N.A. N.A. N.A.

25 192,521 29 0.2 2843 56,274 13 0.2 13

36 43,258 8 0.2 19

28 1,335,122 86 0.1 50

35 147,341 17 0.1 38

22 8,873 1 0.1 40

46 1,036,756 130 0.1 36

2 652,712 69 0.1 42

42 30,089 7 0.2 11

38 1,081,468 148 0.1 32

20 1,360,006 109 0.1 473 166,559 7 0.0 55

33 351,499 46 0.1 35

37 113,900 17 0.1 29

7 262,500 15 0.1 52

39 184,912 19 0.1 44

14 695,716 37 0.1 53

26 106,110 14 0.1 34

15 83,703 13 0.2 27

23 1,560 1 0.6 1

8 19,542 2 0.1 45

1 198,291 21 0.1 41

21 203,516 24 0.1 37

49 270,617 39 0.1 31

55 44,802 10 0.2 14

31 29,375 10 0.3 5

5 6,150 3 0.5 2

56 228,830 53 0.2 12

29 21,521 7 0.3 6

27 377,354 29 0.1 48

12 97,545 11 0.1 39

9 37,429 7 0.2 17


ulation projectionCalifornia DepartEPICenter California Injury Database Online

2004-2006 2004-2006


28/270

http://www.applications.dhs.ca.gov/epicdata/scripts/br

1/15/2009 1/7/2009

California Department of Public Health, Vital Statistics

ntries during time period. Includes ICD-10 Cause of Death Codes: Unintentional -

ct.

epartment of Finance annual population projections (Based on the 2000 U.S. Census).

ion: 5C0FD1AA

lfare/default.aspx http://www.dof.ca.http://www.applications.dhs.ca.gov/epicdata/

lfare/InCareRates. http://www.dof.ca.

Lee, S., Dawson, W., Magruder, J., Ex

rts/methodologieshttp://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Projections/P1/P1

http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Projections/P3/P3
http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/Data/RaceEthnic/Population-00-50/RaceData_2000-2050.phphttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/default.aspxhttp://www.dof.ca.gov/Research/Research.phphttp://www.applications.dhs.ca.gov/epicdata/http://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/InCareRates.aspxhttp://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/Data/RaceEthnic/Population-00-50/RaceData_2000-2050.phphttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsreports/methodologies/default.aspx?report=InCareRateshttp://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Projections/P1/P1.phphttp://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Projections/P3/P3.phphttp://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Projections/P3/P3.phphttp://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Projections/P1/P1.phphttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/cwscmsreports/methodologies/default.aspx?report=InCareRateshttp://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/Data/RaceEthnic/Population-00-50/RaceData_2000-2050.phphttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/InCareRates.aspxhttp://www.applications.dhs.ca.gov/epicdata/http://www.dof.ca.gov/Research/Research.phphttp://cssr.berkeley.edu/ucb_childwelfare/default.aspx


29/270

e Rates based on population projections from the California Department of Finance. Popula

n year is computed by dividing the Point In Time state count of children in child welfare sup

with an open case or referral under the supervision of Child Welfare on the count day.

ent are included in the statewide calculation. Therefore, county values may not sum to staunder the age of 18, therefore they do not directly correspond to the Foster Care: Point In Ti

ent a value of zero. In cells representing quotients, a period may also indicate the indetermi

roken out by age, ethnicity, and gender. See the links below for details:


30/270

29 30 31 32 33

14,784 0.9 N.A. 4,656,440 66,191

503 0.8 33 160,548 2,767


N.A. N.A. N.A. 101 1

25 1.6 3 3,749 23

130 1.3 7 23,903 359

26 1.4 6 4,651 78

11 1.0 19 2,895 20

328 0.7 43 122,084 1,576

17 1.3 9 3,115 23

124 1.5 4 21,812 186

366 0.8 38 125,334 2,099

19 1.3 8 3,789 23

48 0.9 30 13,125 147

81 0.9 24 22,554 198

4 0.5 53 2,062 19

520 1.3 10 112,517 1,910

53 0.7 41 19,617 327

37 1.4 5 6,546 162

5 0.3 57 3,623 49

3,393 0.7 44 1,348,528 17,692



85 1.2 11 20,469 198

58 0.7 47 23,604 364

MVT Nonfatalities2004-2006 (10-19)

MVT Nonfatalities2004-2006 (10-19) per 1,0002004-2006 TotalPopulation (10-

19)

Rank of MVTNonfatalities2004-2006 (10-19) per 1,0002004-2006 Total

Population (10-19)

2007 TotalPopulation (10-17)

Total JuvenileFelony Arrests


31/270

6 0.8 32 1,749 13

46 1.2 12 9,700 194

111 0.8 36 36,774 808

2 0.4 55 1,182 11

2 0.4 56 1,420 7

130 0.7 45 50,827 82547 0.8 34 15,384 176

39 0.9 27 10,746 118

1,214 0.9 26 364,624 4,094

153 1.0 17 41,177 567

4 0.5 54 2,110 21

948 0.9 25 291,380 3,526

1,038 1.6 2 177,021 2,269

27 0.9 28 8,193 119

1,019 0.9 23 293,055 4,179

1,416 1.0 15 370,356 5,497102 0.6 50 41,785 1,371

368 1.0 14 98,630 1,942

90 0.8 37 26,164 245

132 0.5 52 70,226 802

176 1.0 22 47,708 632

397 0.6 51 196,166 3,004

77 0.7 42 25,742 506

87 1.0 16 21,548 318

1 0.6 49 348 4

15 0.8 39 4,786 67

165 0.8 35 51,930 1,474

179 0.9 29 53,756 752

231 0.9 31 75,547 1,245

30 0.7 46 12,617 212

19 0.6 48 7,520 98

10 1.6 1 1,590 3

236 1.0 18 61,646 1,094

24 1.1 13 5,132 83

279 0.7 40 100,513 1,142

94 1.0 21 22,261 442

37 1.0 20 10,501 110


EPICenter California Injury Database OnlineCalifornia Depart California Depart

2004-2006 Calendar Year 200Calendar Year 200


32/270

http://www.applications.dhs.ca.gov/epicdata/ http://www.cdcr.c http://www.cdcr.c

http://www.applications.dhs.ca.gov/epicdata/scripts/br http://www.cdcr.c http://www.cdcr.c

1/7/2009

1/6/2009 1/6/2009

California Department of Public Health, Vital Statistics N/A N/A

Includes ICD-10 Cause of Death Codes: Unintentional - Note: Note:

Population and arrPopulation and arr

calculated by divi calculated by divi

status offense arr status offense arr

N/A N/A

N/A N/A

.php

.php
http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Projections/P1/P1.phphttp://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Projections/P3/P3.phphttp://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Projections/P3/P3.phphttp://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Projections/P1/P1.php


33/270

ion data for the years 1998-1999 are projections based on the 1990 U.S. Census; populatio

ervised foster care by the state child population and then multiplying by 1,000 (for an In Ca

ewide total.me/In Care reports which are based on children ages 0-20. For one-to-one correspondence

nate form 0/0.


34/270

34 35 36 37 38

11.4 N.A. 134,629 23.2 N.A.

13.9 9 3,335 16.7 50


7.5 46 1 7.5 55

4.6 56 102 20.2 41

10.9 28 1,208 36.8 11

13.4 12 205 35.1 15

5.4 54 86 23.1 34

10.3 31 2,524 16.5 52

5.7 53 124 30.9 23

6.8 50 553 20.2 40

13.3 14 5,315 33.7 19

4.8 55 142 29.5 24

8.4 42 587 33.4 21

6.9 49 718 24.9 31

7.5 47 55 21.6 37

13.5 10 2,690 19.0 45

13.0 16 1,416 56.4 1

19.8 3 394 48.1 5

10.1 34 111 22.8 35

10.7 29 27,874 16.9 49



7.7 45 529 20.7 39

12.1 20 1,489 49.5 4

Total JuvenileFelony Arrestsper 1,000 2007

Total Population(10-17)

Rank of TotalJuvenile FelonyArrests per 1,0002007 TotalPopulation (10-

17)

Total JuvenileMisdemeanorArrests

Total JuvenileMisdemeanorArrests per 1,0002007 TotalPopulation (10-

17)

Rank of TotalJuvenileMisdemeanorArrests per 1,0002007 Total

Population (10-17)


35/270

6.0 52 43 19.7 43

16.0 5 445 36.7 12

17.6 4 1,826 39.8 6

7.4 48 9 6.1 58

3.9 57 11 6.1 57

13.0 17 1,983 31.3 229.1 38 257 13.2 54

8.8 41 349 25.9 29

9.0 40 9,080 20.0 42

11.0 27 995 19.3 44

7.9 44 133 50.0 3

9.6 35 6,060 16.5 53

10.3 32 3,845 17.5 47

11.5 23 296 28.6 25

11.4 24 12,357 33.8 18

11.9 21 8,721 18.8 4626.4 1 888 17.1 48

15.5 6 4,743 37.8 10

6.6 51 816 21.9 36

9.2 36 1,458 16.7 51

10.1 33 2,484 39.7 7

12.3 19 8,846 36.3 13

15.0 7 1,216 36.1 14

11.8 22 743 27.5 27

9.0 39 3 6.8 56

11.2 25 228 38.2 9

22.7 2 3,488 53.8 2

11.1 26 2,356 34.9 16

13.2 15 2,637 27.9 26

13.3 13 408 25.7 30

10.4 30 233 24.7 32

1.5 58 75 38.2 8

14.2 8 2,589 33.6 20

12.5 18 141 21.3 38

9.2 37 4,251 34.1 17

13.4 11 807 24.5 33

8.3 43 351 26.6 28


ent of Corrections and Rehabilitatio California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitatio

7 Calendar Year 2007


36/270

.gov/index.html http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/index.html

.gov/Divisions_Boards/CSA/CPP/Granhttp://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Divisions_Boards/CSA/CPP/Gran

1/6/2009

N/A

Note:

est data provided by the California DPopulation and arrest data provided by the California D

ing total arrests by juvenile populaticalculated by dividing total arrests by juvenile populati

st rates per 100,000 population simistatus offense arrest rates per 100,000 population simi

N/A

N/A


37/270

data for the year 2000 and beyond are projections based on the 2000 U.S. Census.

re Rate per 1,000 children in the population). Similarly, each county's In Care Rate for a giv

ith the Point In Time reports users must restrict to the age subgroup 0-17 using the filters.


38/270

39 40 41 42 43

70,216 25.7 N.A.

3,656 38.1 3

213 17.1 32

N.A. N.A. N.A.

35 15.7 34

467 23.3 19

20 6.4 59

15 8.0 54

1,822 24.5 14

18 7.9 55

120 9.1 53

2,889 36.9 4

38 15.5 35

215 19.2 25

363 24.2 16

18 12.8 48

2,169 31.8 8

248 22.2 21

61 14.0 44

18 7.8 56

20,462 28.0 11

1,377 36.5 5

224 26.0 13

313 29.2 10

200 14.2 42


Chlamydia(Females 15-24)

Chlamydia per1,000 2007 TotalPopulation(Females 15-24)

Rank ofChlamydia per1,000 2007 TotalPopulation(Females 15-24)



39/270

11 9.3 52

103 15.2 40

503 22.4 20

9 11.5 49

7 7.6 57

657 22.0 22134 14.4 41

91 13.5 45

3,816 18.0 30

359 15.3 38

21 13.4 46

3,371 19.2 26

4,039 38.8 1

81 16.7 33

4,636 26.5 12

6,196 29.9 91,152 38.2 2

1,807 31.9 7

326 15.2 39

804 19.5 24

636 19.7 23

2,616 24.3 15

356 17.6 31

272 19.0 27

N.A. N.A. N.A.

66 18.9 28

1,123 34.8 6

390 11.3 50

1,042 23.6 17

104 14.0 43

92 18.2 29

7 6.6 58

891 23.4 18

34 9.6 51

943 15.4 37

278 13.1 47

96 15.5 36

N.A. N.A. N.A.

Juvenile Justice CCalifornia Depart California Department of Public Health STD Data Table

2003-2007 2003-2007


40/270

http://www.cdph.chttp://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Pages/STDData

ts/JJCPA/Docs/200

http://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/STD

1/13/2009 1/13/2009

epartment of Justice. Arrest rate per 100,000 population

on and multiplying by 100,000. Felony, misdemeanor and

larly calculated.

NOTE: Source tables on web were revised 6/20/2009, so differ slightly fro

http://www.cdph.ca.g
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/STD-Data-Chlamydia-Provisional-Tables.pdfhttp://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/STD-Data-Chlamydia-Provisional-Tables.pdfhttp://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/STD-Data-Chlamydia-Provisional-Tables.pdf


41/270

n year is computed by dividing the county count of children in child welfare supervised fost


42/270

44 45 46 47 48

52,77037.8

N.A. 109011

1,381 28.0 34 3,053

N.A.

N.A. N.A.

N.A. N.A. N.A. 0

21 17.4 45 95

282 31.4 29 426

30 17.8 44 59

34 N.A. N.A. 72

911 24.1 37 2,695

48 43.8 16 105

111 15.2 48 289

2,224 56.3 7 4,020

47 36.9 23 108

151 31.0 30 363

477 58.7 5 428

31 N.A. N.A. 57

2,119 62.5 3 3,389

359 64.1 1 377

110 45.9 12 214

24 20.5 42 105

14,794 38.9 19 32,986

N.A. N.A. N.A.

N.A. N.A. N.A.

368 63.7 2 603

81 11.3 49 142

2006 Teen Births(15-19)

2006 Teen Births(15-19) per 1,0002006 FemalePopulation (15-19)

Rank of 2006Teen Births (15-19) per 1,0002006 TotalPopulation (15-

19)

9-12 gradersdropout during2006-07 schoolyear


43/270

16 N.A. N.A. 17

108 32.0 28 236

642 57.5 6 834

8 N.A. N.A. 32

22 N.A. N.A. 58

844 55.0 8 769138 30.0 31 297

61 16.4 47 1,640

3,214 29.9 32 4,081

206 16.6 46 574

12 N.A. N.A. 48

3,681 41.4 18 6,540

1,977 37.0 22 4,689

84 34.9 24 106

4,167 46.0 11 9,434

3,789 34.7 25 8,594287 20.7 41 1,152

1,474 52.0 10 3,908

201 19.7 43 474

472 22.3 40 1,018

684 43.1 17 878

1,513 27.2 35 3,159

304 32.3 27 702

230 32.3 26 497

1 N.A. N.A. 14

67 38.8 20 92

486 29.4 33 1,718

438 25.7 36 1,258

1,004 44.3 15 1,774

165 45.6 13 428

112 45.2 14 174

5 N.A. N.A. 30

1,152 60.7 4 1,509

43 23.3 38 83

1,164 37.4 21 1,825

225 23.2 39 408

171 53.9 9 375

N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

State of California, Department of Public Health, Birth Records.California Depart

State of California, Department of Finance, Race/Ethnic Population with A

2006-07 school ye


44/270

Jul-07

http://www.cde.ca

http://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Pages/CountyBirthStatisticalDataT

http://dq.cde.ca.g

15-19 Count

1/14/2009

15-19 Rate

10-14 Count

10-14 Rate http://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/VSC-2006-0231.xls

1/6/2009

10-14 yr olds are included, however the numbers are very low and, gene 1-year 9-12 grade

- Represents zero events.

http://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/VSC

http://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/VSC-2006-0231.xls

http://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/VSC-2006-0229.xls
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/VSC-2006-0221.xlshttp://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/VSC-2006-0231.xlshttp://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/VSC-2006-0229.xlshttp://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/VSC-2006-0229.xlshttp://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/VSC-2006-0231.xlshttp://www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/VSC-2006-0221.xls


45/270

a Percents and rates are not calculated for fewer than five events.

b Rates are not calculated for county/age categories with fewer than 1,000

- Represents zero births.

r care by the county child population and then multiplying by 1,000.


46/270

49 50 51 52 53 54

CI 95%

5.5% N.A. ### 74.3% N.A.

4.5% 35 101,000 82.5% 34

58 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

0.0% 58 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

4.4% 37 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

3.8% 45 14,000 74.3% 22

2.4% 55 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

5.3% 24 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

5.0% 28 75,000 81.0% 32

6.3% 11 10,000 81.8% 33

2.8% 52 15,000 89.9% 43

6.7% 8 50,000 52.3% 1

5.9% 15 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

5.5% 19 7,000 66.0% 5

3.6% 49 12,000 65.9% 4

5.2% 26 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

6.4% 10 62,000 74.0% 19

4.6% 34 10,000 61.6% 2

6.3% 11 4,000 86.8% 39

5.5% 19 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

6.3% 11 759,000 74.1% 21

58 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

58 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

7.0% 5 13,000 77.7% 29

1.5% 57 19,000 87.0% 40

Percent 9-12graders dropoutduring 2006-07school year

Rank of Percent9-12 gradersdropout during2006-07 schoolyear

EstimatedNumber

PercentDrink onedrink orlessyesterday

Rank of PercentDrink one drinkor less yesterday

(72.1 - 76.4

(72.3 - 92.7

(58.9 - 89.6

(70.0 - 91.9

(68.7 - 94.9

(82.2 - 97.5

(37.1 - 67.5

(48.9 - 83.2

(51.3 - 80.6

(60.2 - 87.7

(44.5 - 78.6

(72.9 - 100)

(69.6 - 78.6

(61.6 - 93.7

(71.7 - 100)


47/270

2.0% 56 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

4.9% 30 6,000 79.9% 30

4.7% 33 19,000 69.7% 11

4.1% 42 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

5.9% 15 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

3.7% 46 33,000 87.5% 414.5% 35 8,000 71.7% 13

29.2% 1 7,000 86.4% 38

2.5% 54 206,000 75.4% 25

2.7% 53 22,000 71.7% 13

4.8% 32 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

5.2% 26 163,000 74.0% 19

6.3% 11 96,000 72.3% 15

2.9% 51 4,000 64.9% 3

7.0% 5 151,000 68.3% 10

5.4% 22 209,000 75.0% 235.6% 17 23,000 80.1% 31

9.3% 2 47,000 67.6% 8

3.7% 46 16,000 75.8% 26

3.7% 46 40,000 75.0% 23

4.2% 40 25,000 68.2% 9

4.0% 43 121,000 82.7% 35

5.6% 17 14,000 77.0% 28

4.9% 30 13,000 75.8% 26

6.9% 7 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

4.2% 40 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

7.4% 4 34,000 89.2% 42

5.4% 22 33,000 82.8% 36

5.3% 24 39,000 70.9% 12

6.7% 8 7,000 72.3% 15

5.0% 28 7,000 73.2% 17

4.3% 39 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

5.5% 19 30,000 67.5% 6

3.0% 50 13,000 89.9% 43

3.9% 44 51,000 67.5% 6

4.4% 37 14,000 85.6% 37

8.4% 3 5,000 73.6% 18

N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

ent of Education - Educational Dem California California California Health Interview Su

ar 2007 2007 2007

(65.8 - 94.0

(52.0 - 87.4

(73.7 - 100)(54.8 - 88.6

(70.8 - 100)

(67.3 - 83.5

(56.0 - 87.3

(65.0 - 83.0

(61.5 - 83.1

(49.0 - 80.9

(58.4 - 78.2

(69.2 - 80.8(56.3 - 100)

(50.5 - 84.8

(60.3 - 91.3

(61.1 - 88.8

(47.3 - 89.1

(73.4 - 92.0

(60.7 - 93.3

(59.8 - 91.7

(81.1 - 97.3

(68.9 - 96.7

(55.4 - 86.3

(57.7 - 87.0

(54.1 - 92.3

(51.8 - 83.2

(74.9 - 100)

(53.9 - 81.1

(72.4 - 98.8

(55.5 - 91.7


48/270

.gov/ds/sd/cb/dataquest.asp http://ww http://www http://www.chis.ucla.edu/

v/dataquest/DropoutReporting/Drop http://ww http://wwwhttp://www.chis.ucla.edu/main

### 1/13/2009 1/13/2009

Question: Question: SQuestion: Soda or other sugar

Response Response: Response: Drank one glass or

dropout rate


49/270

population.


50/270

55 56 57 58 59

CI 95%

California 2,798,000 79.7%

79.7%

Alameda 97,000 79.8% 79.8%

N.A. N.A.

N.A.

N.A. N.A. 76.6%

N.A. N.A. 76.6%

Butte 16,000 84.0% 84.0%

N.A. N.A. 76.6%

N.A. N.A. 76.8%

Contra Costa 72,000 77.6% 77.6%

Del Norte, Siskiyo 7,000 59.8% 59.8%

El Dorado 13,000 75.6% 75.6%

Fresno 73,000 77.4% 77.4%

N.A. N.A. 76.8%

Humboldt 7,000 69.6% 69.6%

Imperial 16,000 87.1% 87.1%

N.A. N.A. 76.6%

Kern 78,000 93.2% 93.2%

Kings 14,000 89.8% 89.8%

Lake 4,000 81.9% 81.9%

N.A. N.A. 59.8%

Los Angeles 809,000 79.1% 79.1%

N.A. N.A. N.A.

N.A. N.A. N.A.

Madera 12,000 74.5% 74.5%

Marin 16,000 76.2% 76.2%

Five-a-day Eatless than 5servings offruits/vegetablesdaily)

EstimatedNumber

Percent Eat lessthan 5 servings offruits/vegetablesdaily

Percent Eat less than5 servings offruits/vegetablesdaily (grouped countydata displayed)

(77.8 - 81.6)

(71.7 - 87.8)

(55.3 - 97.9)

(55.3 - 97.9)

(71.6 - 96.3)

(55.3 - 97.9)

(61.0 - 92.5)

(66.7 - 88.5)

(38.4 - 81.1)

(63.9 - 87.3)

(64.9 - 89.8)

(61.0 - 92.5)

(54.7 - 84.6)

(77.2 - 97.0)

(55.3 - 97.9)

(87.0 - 99.5)

(80.0 - 99.6)

(66.7 - 97.2)

(38.4 - 81.1)

(75.0 - 83.2)

(59.6 - 89.3)

(60.0 - 92.5)


51/270

N.A. N.A. 76.6%

Mendocino 6,000 70.9% 70.9%

Merced 23,000 84.3% 84.3%

N.A. N.A. 59.8%

N.A. N.A. 76.6%

Monterey 32,000 86.8% 86.8%Napa 9,000 78.5% 78.5%

Nevada 6,000 74.1% 74.1%

Orange 205,000 75.1% 75.1%

Placer 24,000 77.5% 77.5%

N.A. N.A. 59.8%

Riverside 179,000 81.5% 81.5%

Sacramento 114,000 85.1% 85.1%

San Benito 5,000 86.3% 86.3%

San Bernardino 181,000 81.8% 81.8%

San Diego 216,000 77.5% 77.5%San Francisco 26,000 90.1% 90.1%

San Joaquin 59,000 84.2% 84.2%

San Luis Obispo 14,000 66.3% 66.3%

San Mateo 40,000 75.4% 75.4%

Santa Barbara 29,000 79.4% 79.4%

Santa Clara 110,000 75.2% 75.2%

Santa Cruz 15,000 83.4% 83.4%

Shasta 15,000 86.9% 86.9%

N.A. N.A. 59.8%

N.A. N.A. 59.8%

Solano 25,000 66.4% 66.4%

Sonoma 32,000 79.2% 79.2%

Stanislaus 47,000 85.0% 85.0%

Sutter 9,000 89.5% 89.5%

Tehama, Glenn, C 8,000 76.8% 76.8%

N.A. N.A. 59.8%

Tulare 38,000 85.1% 85.1%

Tuolumne, Calave 11,000 76.6% N.A.

Ventura 67,000 88.2% 88.2%

Yolo 11,000 68.4% 68.4%

Yuba 6,000 93.2% 93.2%

N.A. N.A. N.A.

California Health I California Health I California Health Interview Survey California Health I

2007 2007 2007 2007

(55.3 - 97.9)

(52.3 - 89.6)

(71.6 - 97.0)

(38.4 - 81.1)

(55.3 - 97.9)

(73.5 - 100.0)(62.9 - 94.1)

(56.7 - 91.4)

(67.1 - 83.1)

(63.4 - 91.5)

(38.4 - 81.1)

(72.8 - 90.1)

(76.6 - 93.6)

(76.6 - 96.1)

(74.0 - 89.6)

(71.6 - 83.3)(80.8 - 99.4)

(69.9 - 98.4)

(49.1 - 83.5)

(61.7 - 89.1)

(63.5 - 95.4)

(64.7 - 85.6)

(71.9 - 94.9)

(76.5 - 97.2)

(38.4 - 81.1)

(38.4 - 81.1)

(48.2 - 84.5)

(64.5 - 93.9)

(76.1 - 93.9)

(81.1 - 97.9)

(61.0 - 92.5)

(38.4 - 81.1)

(73.5 - 96.8)

(55.3 - 97.9)

(80.2 - 96.3)

(52.9 - 83.8)

(85.8 - 100)


52/270

http://www.chis.uchttp://www.chis.uchttp://www.chis.ucla.edu/ http://www.chis.uc

http://www.chis.uchttp://www.chis.uchttp://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/outphttp://www.chis.uc

1/13/2009 1/13/2009 1/13/2009 1/13/2009

Question: Five-a-dQuestion: Five-a-dQuestion: Five-a-day (Five or more servi Question: Five-a-d

Response: Eat les Response: Eat les Response: Eat less than 5 servings of fruResponse: Eat les


53/270


54/270

60 62 63 64 65

CI 95%

N.A. 2,272,000 64.7% N.A.

21 72,000 58.8% 9




16 14,000 75.8% 35



26 65,000 70.5% 31

N.A. 9,000 75.3% 34

31 12,000 72.2% 32

29 66,000 69.6% 27


38 7,000 65.7% 18

7 11,000 58.6% 8


1 56,000 66.8% 20

4 12,000 76.4% 37

18 4,000 85.0% 44


24 637,000 62.2% 13



35 11,000 68.6% 25

30 16,000 72.9% 33

Rank of PercentEat less than 5servings offruits/vegetablesdaily (excluding

groupedcounties)

EstimatedNumber

Percent Engagedin vigorousactivity 3 or moredays

Rank of PercentEngaged invigorous activity3 or more days

(62.4 - 67.0)

(46.1 - 71.4)

(59.5 - 92.1)

(56.6 - 84.3)

(56.9 - 93.7)

(58.5 - 85.8)

(55.5 - 83.7)

(48.8 - 82.7)

(43.8 - 73.5)

(51.1 - 82.4)

(60.8 - 92.1)

(73.7 - 96.3)

(57.4 - 67.1)

(50.6 - 86.6)

(56.7 - 89.1)


55/270


37 5,000 62.6% 14

14 15,000 54.7% 3



9 21,000 56.1% 525 8,000 70.0% 30

36 7,000 77.5% 41

34 183,000 66.9% 22

27 25,000 79.5% 43


20 143,000 65.3% 16

11 78,000 58.4% 7

10 4,000 69.8% 28

19 148,000 67.0% 23

27 186,000 66.6% 193 15,000 50.9% 1

15 44,000 62.1% 12

41 16,000 75.9% 36

32 28,000 52.5% 2

22 28,000 76.8% 38

33 102,000 69.8% 28

17 11,000 60.7% 11

8 9,000 54.8% 4



40 30,000 76.9% 39

23 27,000 68.4% 24

13 32,000 57.5% 6

5 6,000 65.5% 17

N.A. 7,000 66.8% 20


11 29,000 64.6% 15

N.A. 10,000 69.4% 26

6 46,000 60.3% 10

39 13,000 78.3% 42

1 5,000 77.2% 40


terview Survey California Health I California Health I California Health Interview Survey

2007 2007 2007

(43.4 - 81.7)

(36.4 - 72.9)

(35.9 - 76.3)(54.6 - 85.4)

(59.3 - 95.7)

(57.9 - 75.8)

(66.6 - 92.4)

(55.6 - 75.1)

(46.2 - 70.6)

(55.4 - 84.2)

(57.4 - 76.6)

(60.5 - 72.7)(24.6 - 77.3)

(44.0 - 80.3)

(61.1 - 90.7)

(36.7 - 68.4)

(59.1 - 94.5)

(59.5 - 80.0)

(42.1 - 79.3)

(36.7 - 72.9)

(62.0 - 91.8)

(49.3 - 87.4)

(41.6 - 73.5)

(49.2 - 81.7)

(46.2 - 87.5)

(48.9 - 80.3)

(46.2 - 92.6)

(46.5 - 74.0)

(64.6 - 92.0)

(59.7 - 94.8)


56/270

la.edu/ http://www.chis.uchttp://www.chis.u http://www.chis.ucla.edu/

la.edu/main/DQ3/ http://www.chis.uchttp://www.chis.u http://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/

1/13/2009 1/13/2009 1/13/2009

ay (Five or more s Question: Vigorou Question: Vigorou Question: Vigorous physical activity

Response: EngageResponse: EngageResponse: Engaged in vigorous activthan 5 servings o


57/270


58/270

66 67 68 69 70

CI 95%

California 2,853,000 81.3% 81.3%

Alameda 89,000 72.9% 72.9%

Alameda--Berkele

N.A. N.A.

N.A.

N.A.

Alpine N.A. N.A. 78.0%

Amador N.A. N.A. 78.0%

Butte 14,000 73.2% 73.2%

Calaveras N.A. N.A. 78.0%

Colusa N.A. N.A. 86.7%

Contra Costa 68,000 73.2% 73.2%

Del Norte, Siskiyo 8,000 67.1% 67.1%

El Dorado 13,000 77.9% 77.9%

Fresno 75,000 79.4% 79.4%

Glenn N.A. N.A. 86.7%

Humboldt 9,000 85.6% 85.6%

Imperial 15,000 84.9% 84.9%

Inyo N.A. N.A. 78.0%

Kern 58,000 69.1% 69.1%

Kings 12,000 77.2% 77.2%

Lake 4,000 82.2% 82.2%

Lassen N.A. N.A. 67.1%

Los Angeles 852,000 83.2% 83.2%

Los Angeles--Long N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

Los Angeles--Pasa N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

Madera 14,000 83.1% 83.1%

Marin 20,000 92.6% 92.6%

Ever diagnosedwith asthma

EstimatedNumber

Percent everdiagnosed withasthma

Percent everdiagnosed withasthma (groupedcounty datadisplayed)

(79.5 - 83.1)

(60.7 - 85.1)

(58.5 - 97.5)

(58.5 - 97.5)

(55.4 - 91.0)

(58.5 - 97.5)

(75.4 - 97.9)

(60.0 - 86.3)

(46.5 - 87.8)

(66.0 - 89.8)

(68.7 - 90.0)

(75.4 - 97.9)

(75.8 - 95.5)

(75.7 - 94.2)

(58.5 - 97.5)

(52.7 - 85.5)

(63.4 - 91.0)

(69.9 - 94.4)

(46.5 - 87.8)

(79.7 - 86.7)

(71.1 - 95.1)

(82.4 - 100)


59/270

Mariposa N.A. N.A. 78.0%

Mendocino 7,000 83.8% 83.8%

Merced 22,000 79.7% 79.7%

Modoc N.A. N.A. 67.1%

Mono N.A. N.A. 78.0%

Monterey 32,000 86.1% 86.1%Napa 9,000 78.4% 78.4%

Nevada 6,000 72.0% 72.0%

Orange 226,000 82.7% 82.7%

Placer 16,000 51.9% 51.9%

Plumas N.A. N.A. 67.1%

Riverside 200,000 91.2% 91.2%

Sacramento 99,000 74.5% 74.5%

San Benito 6,000 92.0% 92.0%

San Bernardino 188,000 84.9% 84.9%

San Diego 226,000 81.1% 81.1%San Francisco 24,000 83.7% 83.7%

San Joaquin 51,000 72.9% 72.9%

San Luis Obispo 16,000 75.5% 75.5%

San Mateo 34,000 63.4% 63.4%

Santa Barbara 29,000 79.9% 79.9%

Santa Clara 122,000 83.5% 83.5%

Santa Cruz 17,000 91.1% 91.1%

Shasta 14,000 84.4% 84.4%

Sierra N.A. N.A. 67.1%

Siskiyou N.A. N.A. 67.1%

Solano 29,000 75.5% 75.5%

Sonoma 32,000 79.7% 79.7%

Stanislaus 46,000 82.6% 82.6%

Sutter 6,000 65.8% 65.8%

Tehama, Glenn, C 9,000 86.7% 86.7%

Trinity N.A. N.A. 67.1%

Tulare 40,000 88.8% 88.8%

Tuolumne, Calave 11,000 78.0% 78.0%

Ventura 67,000 87.9% 87.9%

Yolo 13,000 78.5% 78.5%

Yuba 5,000 87.9% 87.9%

Missing N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.

California Health California Health Interview Survey California Healt

1/13/2009 1/13/2009 1/13/2009

(58.5 - 97.5)

(70.2 - 97.3)

(64.2 - 95.3)

(46.5 - 87.8)

(58.5 - 97.5)

(72.6 - 99.6)(64.7 - 92.1)

(53.0 - 91.0)

(76.5 - 89.0)

(34.6 - 69.2)

(46.5 - 87.8)

(86.5 - 96.0)

(63.1 - 85.9)

(85.3 - 98.6)

(77.9 - 91.9)

(75.8 - 86.5)(65.5 - 100)

(56.3 - 89.5)

(59.3 - 91.8)

(47.5 - 79.3)

(65.3 - 94.6)

(74.7 - 92.3)

(83.6 - 98.6)

(71.5 - 97.3)

(46.5 - 87.8)

(46.5 - 87.8)

(60.2 - 90.9)

(64.7 - 94.7)

(69.7 - 95.4)

(49.0 - 82.6)

(75.4 - 97.9)

(46.5 - 87.8)

(79.4 - 98.2)

(58.5 - 97.5)

(78.7 - 97.2)

(65.2 - 91.8)

(76.0 - 99.8)


60/270

http://www.chis.uhttp://www.chis.ucla.edu/ http://www.chi

utput.asp?_rn=0.

t least 3 days per

Question: Ever diQuestion: Ever diagnosed with asthma? Question: Ever

ity at least three oResponse: Does Response: Does not have asthma Response: Doe

http://www.chis.uhttp://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/output.a http://www.chi
http://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/output.asp?_rn=0.6119501http://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/output.asp?_rn=0.6119501http://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/output.asp?_rn=0.6119501http://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/output.asp?_rn=0.6119501


61/270


62/270

71 73 74 75 76

N.A.

California

2,396,000 68.3%

68.3%

35 Alameda 85,000 69.4% 69.4%

N.A.

N.A.

N.A. 80.2%

N.A. 80.2%

33 Butte 14,000 72.0% 72.0%

N.A. 80.2%

N.A. 55.4%

33 Contra Costa 63,000 67.9% 67.9%

N.A. Del Norte, Siskiyo 10,000 78.1% 78.1%

28 El Dorado 14,000 82.1% 82.1%

25 Fresno 62,000 65.5% 65.5%

N.A. 55.4%

9 Humboldt 8,000 82.3% 82.3%

10 Imperial 11,000 59.3% 59.3%

N.A. 80.2%

38 Kern 60,000 71.5% 71.5%

29 Kings 10,000 63.6% 63.6%

20 Lake 3,000 68.6% 68.6%

N.A. 78.1%

16 Los Angeles 686,000 67.0% 67.0%

N.A. N.A.

N.A. N.A.

17 Madera 8,000 49.2% 49.2%

1 Marin 17,000 80.2% 80.2%

Rank of Percentever diagnosedwith asthma(excludinggrouped

counties)

Normal weight(5th up to 85thpercentile)

Variable (Count) -EstimatedNumber

Percent normalweight (5th up to85th percentile)

Percent normalweight (5th up to85th percentile)(excluding groupedcounties)


63/270

N.A. 80.2%

13 Mendocino 5,000 68.6% 68.6%

23 Merced 17,000 60.7% 60.7%

N.A. 78.1%

N.A. 80.2%

8 Monterey 21,000 55.3% 55.3%27 Napa 9,000 76.8% 76.8%

37 Nevada 8,000 91.4% 91.4%

18 Orange 185,000 67.7% 67.7%

41 Placer 25,000 80.0% 80.0%

N.A. 78.1%

3 Riverside 139,000 63.3% 63.3%

32 Sacramento 90,000 67.7% 67.7%

2 San Benito 5,000 75.5% 75.5%

10 San Bernardino 150,000 68.1% 68.1%

21 San Diego 203,000 72.7% 72.7%14 San Francisco 18,000 63.1% 63.1%

35 San Joaquin 48,000 68.8% 68.8%

30 San Luis Obispo 17,000 78.3% 78.3%

40 San Mateo 41,000 76.2% 76.2%

22 Santa Barbara 22,000 61.4% 61.4%

15 Santa Clara 107,000 72.8% 72.8%

4 Santa Cruz 13,000 71.8% 71.8%

12 Shasta 12,000 72.0% 72.0%

N.A. 78.1%

N.A. 78.1%

30 Solano 28,000 73.4% 73.4%

23 Sonoma 28,000 69.9% 69.9%

19 Stanislaus 38,000 68.1% 68.1%

39 Sutter 6,000 62.2% 62.2%

N.A.Tehama, Glenn, C 5,000 55.4% 55.4%

N.A. 78.1%

5Tulare 19,000 41.5% 41.5%

N.A.Tuolumne, Calave 11,000 80.2% 80.2%

6 Ventura 58,000 76.6% 76.6%

26Yolo 13,000 77.7% 77.7%

6Yuba 5,000 78.1% 78.1%

N.A. N.A.

h Interview Surve California Health I California Health I California Health Interview Survey

2007 2007 2007


64/270

.ucla.edu/ http://www.chis.uchttp://www.chis.u http://www.chis.ucla.edu/

http://www.chis.uchttp://www.chis.u http://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/outp

1/13/2009 1/13/2009 1/13/2009

diagnosed with asQuestion: Body M Question: Body M Question: Body Mass Index - 4 level (tee

s not have asthmaResponse: Normal Response: Normal Response: Normal weight (5th up to 85t

.ucla.edu/main/D
http://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/output.asp?_rn=0.6119501http://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/output.asp?_rn=0.6119501http://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/output.asp?_rn=0.6119501


65/270


66/270

77 78 80 81

CI 95%

N.A. 9221 496 California 69,659

21 390 20 Alameda 85,802

N.A.

N.A. 0 0

N.A. 10 0 Amador C 60,513

25 50 5 Butte Cou 51,942

N.A. 5 1 Calaveras 66,616

N.A. 6 0 Colusa Co 52,645

15 200 13 Contra Co 91,675

N.A. 5 0 Del Norte 53,942

39 45 2 El Dorado 82,607

11 138 26 Fresno Co 51,502

N.A. 8 0 Glenn Co 47,292

40 16 3 Humboldt 52,755

4 18 2 Imperial C 42,163

N.A. 9 0

23 135 10 Kern Cou 50,819

10 19 2 Kings Cou 54,226

18 13 3 Lake Cou 50,903

N.A. 1 0 Lassen Co 62,702

12 2,437 93 Los Angel 61,859

N.A.

N.A.

2 20 0 Madera C 50,201

38 48 6 Marin Cou 110,253

Rank of Percentnormal weight(5th up to 85thpercentile)(excluding

groupedcounties)

Suicide Attempts:NonfatalHospitalized Self-Inflicted Injuries10-19 yr olds

Suicide Attempts:Fatal Self-Inflicted Injuries

Geography

Universe:

FAMILIES

: Medianfamilyincomein thepast 12months(in 2008inflation-adjusteddollars)(Estimate)

(66.0 - 70.5)

(57.1 - 81.7)

(58.7 - 100)

(58.7 - 100)

(54.5 - 89.5)

(58.7 - 100)

(33.8 - 76.9)

(55.0 - 80.8)

(62.5 - 93.7)

(71.9 - 92.4)

(50.9 - 80.2)

(33.8 - 76.9)

(68.5 - 96.1)

(44.6 - 74.0)

(58.7 - 100)

(56.6 - 86.4)

(46.2 - 81.0)

(50.0 - 87.2)

(62.5 - 93.7)

(62.4 - 71.7)

(30.9 - 67.4)

(64.2 - 96.2)


67/270

N.A. 4 1

18 14 3 Mendocin 50,577

5 39 2 Merced C 48,071

N.A. 3 0

N.A. 3 0

3 133 6 Monterey 63,80433 27 1 Napa Cou 80,112

41 27 2 Nevada C 66,419

13 991 41 Orange C 85,691

37 33 4 Placer Co 86,419

N.A. 1 1 Plumas C 61,490

9 1,025 35 Riverside 65,104

13 252 30 Sacramen 66,812

30 19 1 San Benit 79,558

16 622 35 San Berna 62,790

27 605 34 San Diego 74,5938 75 6 San Franc 87,583

20 166 12 San Joaqu 62,015

36 137 4 San Luis 72,032

31 161 10 San Mate 100,201

6 100 3 Santa Bar 69,855

28 371 14 Santa Cla 101,832

24 49 6 Santa Cru 83,217

25 28 6 Shasta Co 53,868

N.A. 1 0

N.A. 9 2 Siskiyou C 46,756

29 65 6 Solano Co 77,162

22 112 5 Sonoma C 78,124

16 266 9 Stanislaus 58,282

7 13 1 Sutter Co 59,549

N.A. 16 0 Tehama C 43,026

N.A. 0 0

1 54 13 Tulare Co 47,179

N.A. 17 3 Tuolumne 59,583

32 162 7 Ventura C 84,996

34 33 4 Yolo Coun 73,791

35 15 3 Yuba Cou 52,454

N.A.

California Health Interview Survey

2007 2004-2006 2004-2006

(58.7 - 100)

(49.8 - 87.4)

(43.0 - 78.3)

(62.5 - 93.7)

(58.7 - 100)

(34.5 - 76.0)(61.9 - 91.7)

(82.7 - 100)

(59.1 - 76.3)

(66.2 - 93.8)

(62.5 - 93.7)

(53.1 - 73.4)

(56.2 - 79.2)

(60.8 - 90.1)

(58.5 - 77.6)

(66.9 - 78.6)(36.5 - 89.7)

(51.8 - 85.8)

(63.7 - 93.0)

(62.2 - 90.2)

(42.2 - 80.6)

(61.1 - 84.4)

(51.3 - 92.3)

(57.1 - 86.9)

(62.5 - 93.7)

(62.5 - 93.7)

(58.2 - 88.6)

(50.4 - 89.4)

(53.9 - 82.3)

(46.3 - 78.0)

(33.8 - 76.9)

(62.5 - 93.7)

(25.8 - 57.3)

(58.7 - 100)

(65.3 - 87.9)

(64.4 - 90.9)

(63.0 - 93.3)

EPICenter CaliforniaInjury DatabaseOnline

EPICenter CaliforniaInjury DatabaseOnline 2006-200 2006-200

2006-2008

2006-2008
http://openmetadatabrowser%28%22dataset%22%2C%20%22acs_2008_3yr_g00_%22%2C%20%22%22%2C%20%22_lang%3Den%22%29/http://openmetadatabrowser%28%22dataset%22%2C%20%22acs_2008_3yr_g00_%22%2C%20%22%22%2C%20%22_lang%3Den%22%29/http://openmetadatabrowser%28%22dataset%22%2C%20%22acs_2008_3yr_g00_%22%2C%20%22%22%2C%20%22_lang%3Den%22%29/http://openmetadatabrowser%28%22dataset%22%2C%20%22acs_2008_3yr_g00_%22%2C%20%22%22%2C%20%22_lang%3Den%22%29/


68/270

http://www.chis.ucla.edu/ http://www.applic http://www.applic

http://www.chis.ucla.edu/main/DQ3/ http://www.applicatiohttp://www.applicatio

1/13/2009 5/20/2009 5/20/2009

Question: Body Mass Index - 4 level

Response: Normal weight (5th up to 85th percentile)

Data are Data are

1. An '*' e 1. An '*' e

2. An '**' 2. An '**'

www.factfwww.factf5000US06103&-geo_id=0

5000US06107&-geo_id=05000US06109&-geo_id=05000US06111&-geo_id=05000US06113&-geo_id=05000US0

6115&-search_results=01000US&-dataitem=ACS_2008_3YR_G2000_B19113.B19113_1_EST&-format=

&-subj_treenode_id=17554707&-

_lang=en

5000US06103&-geo_id=0




_lang=enCTSavedQuery.xql

CTSavedQuery.xql

California Office ofStatewide Health

Planning andDevelopment, PatientDischarge Data.

California Department

of Public Health, VitalStatistics DeathStatistical Master File

12/15/2009

12/15/2009
http://www.factfinder.census.gov/http://www.factfinder.census.gov/http://www.factfinder.census.gov/


69/270

3. An '-' e 3. An '-' e

4. An '-' fo4. An '-' fo

5. An '+' f5. An '+' f

6. An '***' 6. An '***'

7. An '*** 7. An '***

8. An 'N' e8. An 'N'9. An (X) 9. An (X)


70/270

row \ colBC

2

236 12

1,209 Tehama, Glenn, Colusa 58 Tehama, Glenn, Colusa

61

5,500

2,430

5,218

5,622

1,272

7,879

3,776

1,141

3,515

2,848

2,302

968

2,961

4,742

7,535

367

2,161

3,322

Universe:

FAMILIES: Medianfamilyincomein thepast 12months(in 2008inflation-adjusteddollars)(Marginof Error(+/-))

Standard Groupings (bycounty pop?)

Five-a-day Eat less than 5servings offruits/vegetables daily)

Del Norte, Siskiyou, Lassen,Trinity, Modoc, Plumas,Sierra

Del Norte, Siskiyou, Lassen,Trinity, Modoc, Plumas, Sierra

Tuolumne, Calaveras,Amador, Inyo, Mariposa,Mono, Alpine

Tuolumne, Calaveras, Amador,Inyo, Mariposa, Mono, Alpine


71/270

3,183

1,928

2,0543,486

3,584

793

2,326

4,198

769

962

4,957

793

7482,597

1,345

1,951

1,841

1,662

1,064

2,495

1,784

2,824

1,729

1,868

1,565

3,090

3,333

1,373

4,432

1,360

3,278

3,419

2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates

2006-2008
http://openmetadatabrowser%28%22dataset%22%2C%20%22acs_2008_3yr_g00_%22%2C%20%22%22%2C%20%22_lang%3Den%22%29/http://openmetadatabrowser%28%22dataset%22%2C%20%22acs_2008_3yr_g00_%22%2C%20%22%22%2C%20%22_lang%3Den%22%29/


72/270

Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of unc

1. An '*' entry in the margin of error column indicates that too few sample observation

2. An '**' entry in the margin of error column indicates that no sample observations w

www.factf5000US06103&-geo_id=0




_lang=enCTSavedQuery.xql

12/15/2009
http://www.factfinder.census.gov/http://www.factfinder.census.gov/


73/270

3. An '-' entry in the estimate column indicates that no sample observations were avail

4. An '-' following a median estimate means the median falls in the lowest interval of a

5. An '+' following a median estimate means the median falls in the upper interval of

6. An '***' entry in the margin of error column indicates that the median falls in the lo

7. An '*****' entry in the margin of error column indicates that the estimate is controll

8. An 'N' entry in the estimate and margin of error columns indicates that data for this9. An (X) means that the estimate is not applicable or not available.


74/270

BN BU

County Row

Del Norte 12

Tehama, Glenn, Colusa Tehama, Glenn, Colusa Lassen 22

Modoc 31

Plumas 38

Sierra 52

Siskiyou 53

Trinity 59

Colusa 10

Glenn 15

Tehama 58

Alpine 6

Amador 7

Calaveras 9

Inyo 18

Mariposa 28

Mono 32

Tuolumne 61

Ever diagnosed withasthma

Normal weight (5th up to85th percentile)






75/270


76/270

ertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented

s were available to compute a standard error and thus the margin of err

re available to compute a standard error and thus the margin of error. A


77/270

lable to compute an estimate, or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated

n open-ended distribution.

n open-ended distribution.

est interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution. A statistical

d. A statistical test for sampling variability is not appropriate.

geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample ca


78/270

Standard Groupings (alpha)

Del Norte, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Sierra, Siskiyou, Trinity

Colusa, Glenn, Tehama

Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Inyo, Mariposa, Mono, Tuolumne


79/270


80/270

hrough the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. T

r. A statistical test is not appropriate.

statistical test is not appropriate.


81/270

because one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of a

test is not appropriate.

es is too small.


82/270


83/270


84/270

he margin of error can be interpreted roughly as providing 90 percent probability that the i


85/270


86/270


87/270


88/270

interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margi


89/270


90/270


91/270


92/270

in of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value.


93/270


94/270

Area 1: Contra Costa

Area 2: Marin

Substance Use

Have never tried drugs

% CI % CI

Contra Costa 93.8(89.1 - 98.4) 95.6 (91.1 - 100)

Marin 77.1(59.5 - 94.8) 87.2 (72.0 - 100)

Guide

Did not engage in bingedrinking during the pastmonth

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Substance Use

%


95/270

Tobacco Use

Never smoked regularly

% CI % CI

Contra Costa 81.5 (55.2 - 100) 98.8 (97.0 - 100)

Marin 18.9 (0 - 47.8) 92.2(86.3 - 98.2)

Drink one sugary drink or less yesterday

% CIContra Costa 81.0

Marin 87

Did not smoke in past 30days

Drink one sugary drink orless yesterday

(70.0 - 91.9)

(71.7 - 100)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Tobacco Use

%

100

Drink one sugary drink or less yesterday


96/270

Eat less than 5 servings of fruits/vegetables daily

% CI

Contra Costa 77.6

Marin 76.2

Eat less than 5 servingsof fruits/vegetables daily

(66.7 - 88.5)

(60.0 - 92.5)

Drink one sugary drink or less yesterday0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

81.0

87

%

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

77.6 76.2

Eat less than 5 servings of fruits/vegetables daily

%


97/270

Engaged in vigorous activity 3 or more days (per week)

% CI

Contra Costa 70.5

Marin 72.9

Ever diagnosed with asthma

% CI

Contra Costa 73.2

Engaged in vigorousactivity 3 or more days

(56.6 - 84.3)

(56.7 - 89.1)

Ever diagnosed withasthma

(60.0 - 86.3)

Eat less than 5 servings of fruits/vegetables daily0

Engaged in vigorous activity 3 or more days (per week)0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

70.572.9

gaged in vigorous activity 3 or more days (per we

%


98/270

Marin 92.6

Normal weight (5th to 85th percentile)

% CI

Contra Costa 67.9

Marin 80.2

(82.4 - 100)

Normal weight (5th to85th percentile)

(55.0 - 80.8)

(64.2 - 96.2)

Ever diagnosed with asthma0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

73.2

92.6

Ever diagnosed with asthma

%

50

60

70

80

90

100

67.9

80.2

Normal weight (5th to 85th percentile)

%


99/270

Always wear a seatbelt


% CI

Contra Costa 81.8(71.3 - 92.2)

Marin 80.8(64.4 - 97.1)

Not likely to have psychological distress during the past month

Normal weight (5th to 85th percentile)0

10

20

30

40

Always wear a seatbelt0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

81.8 80.8


%


100/270


101/270

Did not receive psychological/emotional counseling in past year

% CI

Contra Costa 85.8(76.1 - 95.5)

Marin 75.8(58.0 - 93.6)


Teens at risk for depression0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

23.1 22.7

%

id not receive psychological/ emotional counseling in past y0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

85.8

75.8


%


102/270

Used a condom during last sex

% CI

Contra Costa 90.0 (74.3 - 100)

Marin 78.5 (45.3 - 100)

Has not had sex

Has not had sex

% CI

Contra Costa 80.9(68.3 - 93.5)

Marin 54(28.0 - 80.0)

Used a condom duringlast sex

Used a condom during last sex0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

90.0

78.5

Used a condom during last sex

%


103/270

Has not had sex0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

80.9

54

Has not had sex

%


104/270

*Aggregate data for Del Norte, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Sierra, Siskiyou, and Trinit

**Aggregate data for Colusa, Glenn, and Tehama Counties

***Aggregate data for Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Inyo, Mariposa, Mono, and Tuolu


105/270


106/270


107/270


108/270


109/270


110/270


111/270


112/270


113/270


114/270

Counties

mne Counties


115/270


116/270


117/270


118/270


119/270


120/270


121/270


122/270


123/270


124/270

California 89.2 95.2

Alameda 83.6 (76.0 - 91.2) 93.8 (89.0 - 98.6)

Alameda--Berkeley City

Alpine 88.9 (73.9 - 100) 82.9 (63.1 - 100)

Amador 88.9 (73.9 - 100) 82.9 (63.1 - 100)

Butte 77.1 94.7 (84.4 - 100)

Calaveras 88.9 (73.9 - 100) 82.9 (63.1 - 100)

Colusa 85.5 (70.8 - 100) 96.7 (91.8 - 100)Contra Costa 93.8 (89.1 - 98.4) 95.6 (91.1 - 100)

Del Norte 75.2 (56.9 - 93.4) 88.2 (74.3 - 100)

El Dorado 88.3 (79.7 - 96.9) 92.2 (83.3 - 100)

Fresno 85.2 93.7 (86.7 - 100)

Glenn 85.5 (70.8 - 100) 96.7 (91.8 - 100)

Humboldt 80 (65.3 - 94.7) 92.6 (82.9 - 100)

Imperial 95.3 (88.8 - 100) 94.5 (87.4 - 100)

Inyo 88.9 (73.9 - 100) 82.9 (63.1 - 100)

Kern 87.7 (78.4 - 96.9) 96.7 (93.3 - 100.0)

Kings 93.2 (84.3 - 100) 96 (90.8 - 100)

Lake 74.6 (54.7 - 94.5) 77.7 (57.7 - 97.7)

Lassen 75.2 (56.9 - 93.4) 88.2 (74.3 - 100)

Los Angeles 92.6 (90.2 - 95.0) 97.1 (95.4 - 98.8)

Los Angeles--Long Beach City

Los Angeles--Pasadena City

Madera 85.4 (72.2 - 98.6) 100 (100.0 - 100.0)

Marin 77.1 (59.5 - 94.8) 87.2 (72.0 - 100)

Mariposa 88.9 (73.9 - 100) 82.9 (63.1 - 100)

Mendocino 81.4 (67.9 - 95.0) 78 (61.6 - 94.3)

Merced 83.1 (68.4 - 97.7) 95.7 (91.0 - 100)

Modoc 75.2 (56.9 - 93.4) 88.2 (74.3 - 100)

Mono 88.9 (73.9 - 100) 82.9 (63.1 - 100)

Monterey 91.5 (76.7 - 100) 99.1 (97.2 - 100)

Napa 93.1 (86.5 - 99.7) 100 (100.0 - 100.0)

Nevada 81.4 (62.3 - 100) 81.4 (62.3 - 100)

Orange 88.8 (82.5 - 95.0) 93.3 (88.2 - 98.3)

Placer 87.3 (75.2 - 99.4) 89.5 (77.9 - 100)

Substance

Use

Have nevertried drugs

(%)

Have nevertried drugs

(CI)

Did notengage in

binge drinking

during thepast month

(%)

Did notengage in

binge drinking

during thepast month

(CI)

(87.7 - 90.7) (94.2 - 96.2)

(58.5 - 95.7)

(75.4 - 95.1)


125/270

Plumas 75.2 (56.9 - 93.4) 88.2 (74.3 - 100)

Riverside 94 (89.7 - 98.3) 96.8 (92.2 - 100)

Sacramento 92.7 (87.6 - 97.9) 95.7 (91.5 - 99.9)

San Benito 92.2 (84.0 - 100) 89.4 (76.1 - 100)

San Bernardino 85.3 (76.3 - 94.3) 97.2 (94.7 - 99.6)

San Diego 89.6 (85.7 - 93.5) 96.8 (94.9 - 98.8)San Francisco 65.9 (39.2 - 92.5) 76.5 (51.5 - 100)

San Joaquin 84.7 (70.5 - 98.9) 91.8 (82.3 - 100)

San Luis Obispo 77.3 (61.4 - 93.1) 82.2 (67.9 - 96.4)

San Mateo 85.1 (74.1 - 96.1) 92.5 (83.3 - 100)

Santa Barbara 97.9 (93.7 - 100) 96.5 (89.8 - 100)

Santa Clara 77.7 (65.7 - 89.7) 89.8 (79.7 - 100.0)

Santa Cruz 80 (68.0 - 92.0) 88.2 (79.0 - 97.4)

Shasta 91.7 (83.8 - 99.6) 94.3 (87.6 - 100)

Sierra 75.2 (56.9 - 93.4) 88.2 (74.3 - 100)

Siskiyou 75.2 (56.9 - 93.4) 88.2 (74.3 - 100)Solano 77.9 (62.2 - 93.7) 92.2 (81.9 - 100)

Sonoma 92.8 (81.7 - 100) 94.6 (84.3 - 100)

Stanislaus 92.5 (82.3 - 100) 96.2 (92.3 - 100.0)

Sutter 84.4 (72.2 - 96.6) 96.3 (91.7 - 100)

Tehama 85.5 (70.8 - 100) 96.7 (91.8 - 100)

Trinity 75.2 (56.9 - 93.4) 88.2 (74.3 - 100)

Tulare 98.5 (96.3 - 100) 100 (100.0 - 100.0)

Tuolumne 88.9 (73.9 - 100) 82.9 (63.1 - 100)

Ventura 88.7 (79.0 - 98.4) 97.1 (92.6 - 100)

Yolo 97.5 (94.4 - 100) 97.6 (94.5 - 100)

Yuba 98.7 (96.1 - 100) 98.7 (96.1 - 100)

Missing

Source Name CHIS CHIS CHIS CHIS

Source Home Page

Data Retrieval Instructions

Sign in to askCHIS

Geographical Area

www.chis.ucla.edu

www.chis.ucla.edu

www.chis.ucla.edu

www.chis.ucla.edu

Data RetrievalInstructions




Sign in toaskCHIS

Sign in toaskCHIS

Sign in toaskCHIS

Sign in toaskCHIS

Select"SpecificCounties inCalifornia"and CHECKALL. Click"Updategeographicalarea."





126/270

Main Topic

Source Date 2007 2007 2007 2007

Finishing

Date Accessed 8/27/2009 8/27/2009 8/27/2009 8/27/2009

Recommended Citation

Page Notes

Select "HealthBehaviors" >"Illicit DrugUse" > "Evertriedmarijuana,

cocaine,sniffing glue,other drugs"

Select "HealthBehaviors" >"Illicit DrugUse" > "Evertriedmarijuana,

cocaine,sniffing glue,other drugs"

Select "HealthBehaviors" >"Alcohol Use"> "Bingedrinking in thepast month"

Select "HealthBehaviors" >"Alcohol Use"> "Bingedrinking in thepast month"

Click "Getyour results,"

select the"Geographic

Comparing"tab, and click"compare

geographicareas."




geographicareas."




geographicareas."




geographicareas."

Ever triedmarijuana,cocaine,

sniffing glue,other drugs

Ever triedmarijuana,cocaine,

sniffing glue,other drugs

Binge drinkingis defined

differently forboth males

and females.For males,

binge drinkersare those thathave had fiveor more drinks

on at leastone occasionin the pastmonth. Forfemales,

binge drinkersare those thathave had fouror more drinks

on at leastone occasionin the past

month.

Binge drinkingis defined

differently forboth males

and females.For males,

binge drinkersare those thathave had fiveor more drinks

on at leastone occasionin the pastmonth. Forfemales,

binge drinkersare those thathave had fouror more drinks

on at leastone occasionin the past

month.


127/270

Population Differences

1 2 3 4 5

No statisticallysignificant

difference bygender or

race



race



race



race


128/270

Tobacco Use Injury

69.1 96.5 79.6

65.8 (38.4 - 93.1) 96.4 81.1 (75.1 - 87.0)

89.0 (63.2 - 100) 94.8 (84.8 - 100) 89.8 (79.5 - 100)

89.0 (63.2 - 100) 94.8 (84.8 - 100) 89.8 (79.5 - 100)

95.7 (86.3 - 100) 93.2 (80.3 - 100) 76.3 (63.7 - 88.9)

94.8 (84.8 - 100) 89.8 (79.5 - 100)

88.4 (69.2 - 100) 97 (92.7 - 100) 78.1 (63.3 - 92.9)81.5 (55.2 - 100) 98.8 (97.0 - 100) 81.8 (71.3 - 92.2)

49.9 (13.3 - 86.6) 93.2 (85.3 - 100) 74.0 (60.2 - 87.9)

96.8 (92.0 - 100) 85.3 (75.0 - 95.6)

71.1 (41.6 - 100) 98.1 76.2 (62.3 - 90.1)

88.4 (69.2 - 100) 97 (92.7 - 100) 78.1 (63.3 - 92.9)

94 (88.0 - 100.0) 84.9 (72.5 - 97.2)

78.6 (48.1 - 100) 90.9 (78.9 - 100) 84.0 (75.6 - 92.4)

89.0 (63.2 - 100) 94.8 (84.8 - 100) 89.8 (79.5 - 100)

71.0 (45.7 - 96.4) 97.8 (93.6 - 100) 77.7 (66.5 - 88.9)

72.7 (34.1 - 100) 93.1 (84.6 - 100) 77.1 (64.0 - 90.3)

50.6 (10.0 - 91.1) 91.2 (82.4 - 100) 88.1 (66.3 - 100)

49.9 (13.3 - 86.6) 93.2 (85.3 - 100) 74.0 (60.2 - 87.9)

68.7 (55.0 - 82.3) 97.1 (95.6 - 98.7) 78.2 (74.5 - 81.9)

100.0 (100.0 - 100.0) 92.4 (85.4 - 99.4) 71.5 (58.4 - 84.6)

18.9 (0 - 47.8) 92.2 (86.3 - 98.2) 80.8 (64.4 - 97.1)

89.0 (63.2 - 100) 94.8 (84.8 - 100) 89.8 (79.5 - 100)

48.7 (10.6 - 86.7) 96.5 (89.5 - 100) 88.6 (74.8 - 100)

73.8 (44.5 - 100) 94.7 (88.1 - 100) 73.5 (61.2 - 85.9)

49.9 (13.3 - 86.6) 93.2 (85.3 - 100) 74.0 (60.2 - 87.9)

89.0 (63.2 - 100) 94.8 (84.8 - 100) 89.8 (79.5 - 100)

100.0 (100.0 - 100.0) 99.4 (98.4 - 100) 50.6 (32.7 - 68.5)

43.0 (0 - 86.5) 100 (100.0 - 100.0) 66.1 (47.8 - 84.4)

100.0 (100.0 - 100.0) 95.4 (86.6 - 100) 73.2 (55.3 - 91.1)

55.7 (30.7 - 80.7) 97.4 (93.6 - 100) 86.7 (80.6 - 92.8)

55.5 (2.6 - 100) 93.7 (81.7 - 100) 96.4 (92.4 - 100)

Did not smokein past 30days (%)

Did not smokein past 30days (CI)

Never smoked

regularly (%)

Never smoked

regularly (CI)

Always wear a

seatbelt (%)

Always wear a

seatbelt (CI)

(63.4 - 74.9) (95.6 - 97.4) (77.8 - 81.4)

(91.6 - 100)

(94.5 - 100)


129/270


130/270

2007 2007 2005 2005 2003 2003

8/27/2009 8/27/2009 8/27/2009 8/27/2009 8/27/2009 8/27/2009

Select "HealthBehaviors" >"Tobacco(Smoking)" >"Cigarettessmoked per

day (pastmonth) if teenhas eversmoked"

Select "HealthBehaviors" >"Tobacco(Smoking)" >"Cigarettessmoked per

day (pastmonth) if teenhas eversmoked"

Select "HealthBehaviors" >"Tobacco(Smoking)" >"Smokinghistory

(adolescents)"

Select "HealthBehaviors" >"Tobacco(Smoking)" >"Smokinghistory

(adolescents)"

Select "Injuryand ViolencePrevention" >"Injury andViolencePrevention" >

"Frequency ofwearing aseat belt incars"

Select "Injuryand ViolencePrevention" >"Injury andViolencePrevention" >

"Frequency ofwearing aseat belt incars"




geographicareas."




geographicareas."




geographicareas."




geographicareas."




geographicareas."




geographicareas."

This variableis not asked of

everyone:Asked of

adolescents12 - 17 yearsof age whohave eversmoked a

cigarette.

This variableis not asked of

everyone:Asked of

adolescents12 - 17 yearsof age whohave eversmoked a

cigarette.

Constructvariable

shows age-by-age frequencyof when teenfirst begansmoking, if

ever.

Constructvariable

shows age-by-age frequencyof when teenfirst begansmoking, if

ever.

F

Additional Indicators DRAFT 20091214

Documents

Transcript of Additional Indicators DRAFT 20091214