| CEOGC
DATA
The Council for Economic Opportunties in Greater Cleveland generates a variety of data on poverty, income, job and earnings trends, welfare change, and other measures of local economic conditions. The continually updated data are available here in pdf format. NEW- The State of Poverty in Ohio: 2005 Published by the Ohio Association of
Community
Action Agencies, this seventh annual report contains updated CEOGC data
on
trends in Ohio income inequality, the impact of the 2001-2004 Ohio
recession, a significant poverty undercount in the 2000 census, and
figures documenting large cuts in the federal minimum wage that have
moved low wage workers into poverty. Updated job
growth
figures now show that Ohio has lost 228,656 jobs during the recession,
a loss of one out of every 23 jobs in the state. The recession caused
widespread income losses for average taxpayers in Ohio. Download
The
State of Poverty
in Ohio: 2005 911K pdf file The State of Poverty in Ohio: 2004 Published by the Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies, this sixth annual report contains CEOGC data on current trends in Ohio income inequality, the impact of the 2001-2004 Ohio recession, a significant poverty undercount in the 2000 census, and figures documenting large cuts in the federal minimum wage that have moved low wage workers into poverty. Download The
State of Poverty
in Ohio: 2004 665K pdf file The State of Poverty in Ohio: 2003 Published by the Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies, this fifth annual report contains CEOGC data on current trends in Ohio income inequality, the impact of the 2001-2003 Ohio recession, and a significant poverty undercount in the 2000 census. Updated job growth figures now show that Ohio has lost 134,429 jobs during the past year, and has lost 203,212 during the past two years. Download The State of Poverty in Ohio: 2003 506K pdf file The State of Poverty in Ohio: 2002 Published by the Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies, this fourth annual report contains CEOGC data on current trends in Ohio income inequality, the impact of the 2001-2002 Ohio recession, and the relationship between child poverty and welfare reform. Updated job growth figures now show that 87 of Ohio's 88 counties have lost jobs at some point during the current recession. Delaware County is the only exception. Download part one: Analysis and Recommendations 1100K pdf file Download part two: Data and Statistics 716K pdf file 1986-2002 Income Trends in Ohio Counties and School Districts Income inequality grew significantly
across Ohio
during the 1980's and 1990's. Data on the mean income of a taxpayer
from
Ohio state income tax returns show that while Cuyahoga County incomes
grew
by 5% since 1986, they soared in already affluent communities while
they
fell in Cleveland and some of its inner suburbs. However, since 2000 during the recession
in Ohio, the income of an average taxpayer fell in all Cuyahoga County communities
with the exception of Shaker Heights and Richmond Heights. Income
losses from the recession were not
limited only to Cleveland and its inner ring suburbs. Income losses
from the recession have been widespread across metropolitan Cleveland,
in the suburbs as well as in the city of Cleveland. Mean real incomes fell on a two year basis between 2000 and 2002 in 508 Ohio school districts, with incomes rising in only 104 districts. On a statewide basis, the onset of the recession during the fourth quarter of 2000 resulted in widespread declines in real mean incomes in Ohio communities. When data from 2003 state income tax returns are available, they will certainly show even more widespread income erosion in Ohio. The 2000-2004 recession in Ohio caused considerable income decline and human suffering on a very widespread basis all across Ohio. Cuyahoga County Within Ohio's local communities, incomes have grown very substantially in affluent areas during the last 16 years, at the same time as they have fallen in low income communities. Between 1986 and 2002, mean real incomes increased in 396 of Ohio's school districts, including all relatively affluent districts, while they declined during the last 16 years in 296 predominantly low income districts. Among Ohio taxpayers, during the last 16 years the rich have gotten richer while the poor have gotten poorer. NEW- Both Cleveland and its Cuyahoga County Suburbs hit
Hard by Recession On a one-time basis, figures are availble from the Ohio
Department of Jobs and Family Services measuing the
location of lost Cuyahoga County jobs during the first quarter of years
during the 2000's
recession, in 2002, 2003, and 2004. These figures provide a revised and
updated measure of job losses in both the city of Cleveland and in the
suburbs. Cuyahoga County
lost additional jobs both prior to 1Q 2002 and after 1Q 2004, but
during the two year period for which data are available, jobs were lost
both in the city and in the suburbs. A majority of the large
manufacturing job loss during the two year period was in the suburbs,
not in the city. Between 1Q 2002
and 1Q 2004, 58% of all manufacturing jobs lost in Cuyahoga County were
jobs formerly located in the suburbs, not inside the city of Cleveland.
Conversely, 96% of all nonmanufacturing jobs lost during that one year
period were jobs formerly located in the city of Cleveland, not in the
suburbs. It is clear that the impact of the 2000's recession has been
very broadly based in Cuyahoga County, with the economic damage
negatively impacting both the city of Cleveland and its suburbs..
Cuyahoga County City-Suburb Employment
Trends, 1Q 2002 to 1Q 2004 The industrial breakdown of job losses in Cuyahoga County
during this period of time shows that the largest paycheck earnings
losses in Cleveland were in Manufacturing. But, the second largest loss
among industries was in Professional and Technical Serivces, a job
category largely constisting of lawyers, scientists and engineers.
Thus, the large manufacturing job losses rippled through professional
sectors of the Cleveland economy, showing the importance of
manufacturing earnings as they support other local economic activity. City of Cleveland Job and Earnings
Trend, 1Q 2002 to 1Q 2004 In the suburbs, a large manufacturing earnings loss severely
damaged the local economy. The second largest earnings loss in the
suburbs was in Information, a job category including media and
technology firms. Local Professional and Technical Services paycheck
losses were largely concentrated in the city of Cleveland, not in the
suburbs. Conversely, Cuyahoga County's large loss in Utilities earnings
was heavily concentrated in the suburbs. Overall, 54% of Cuyahoga
County's job losses between 2002 and 2004 were in the suburbs, and 72%
of the aggregate paycheck losses in the county came in suburban firms. Cuyahoga County Suburbs Job and
Earnings Trend, 1Q 2002 to 1Q 2004 In Cuyahoga County generally, earnings losses were widespread
in the local economy, driven by large earnings losses in blue collar
industries. The only large paycheck earnings increase in both Cleveland
and the suburbs during these two years of the recession came in Finance
and Insurance, as Cleveland continues to be an expanding financial
services center. Most of that earnings gain came in the suburbs, as the
city of Cleveland actually lost finance and insurance jobs. Many
industries suffered job and earnings losses in
both Cleveland and in the suburbs. Meanwhile, the average earnings of a
surviving job increased above inflation by 3%. Cuyahoga County Job and Earnings
Trend, 1Q 2002 to 1Q 2004 Ohio/Cleveland Job and Losses During 2000-2004 Recession Greater Cleveland and Ohio have been hit very hard by the
current
economic recession.
Job losses have been much steeper during 2000-2004 than
they
were during the 1990-1992 recession. Cuyahoga County lost 8.8%
of its jobs between 2000 and 2004,
a loss of 71,375 jobs. Ohio was also hit very hard by the recession. Between the
first quarter of 2000 and the first quarter of 2004, Ohio lost 5% of
its jobs, a loss of 263,507 jobs. Astonishingly, between the first quarter of 2000 and the first
quarter of 2004 the United States lost
710,000 jobs. More than one third of the jobs lost in the USA during
the 2000's recession were in Ohio alone. By the third quarter of 2004, Ohio finally stopped losing jobs
as the trough of the Ohio recession in 2000-2004 was finally hit.
However, even though new fourth quarter 2004 figures, Cuyahoga County
is still losing jobs. Unfortunately Cuyahoga County's labor market has
not yet entered the economic recovery phase from the 2000-2004
recession. First Quarter 2000-2004 Job "growth," 88 Ohio Counties First Quarter
2000-2004
Job "growth," Cleveland-Akron-Lorain-Elyria CSA Second Quarter
2000-2004 Job
"growth" 88 Ohio Counties Third
Quarter 2000-2004 Job
"growth" 88 Ohio Counties NEW- Fourth Quarter 2000-2004 Job "growth" 88 Ohio Counties NEW- Fourth Quarter 2000-2004 Job "growth," Cleveland-Akron-Lorain-Elyria CSA
Greater Cleveland and Ohio have been extremely hard hit by
very recent manufacturing job losses during the ongoing 2000-2004
recession in Ohio's labor market. Unfortunately, the US Department of
Labor decided to count manufacturing jobs using a new NAICS definition
after the recession started. NAICS replaced the longstanding SIC system
of defining a manufacturing job. There are still no NAICS figures for
the year 2000 in Ohio. Thus, there are no local measures of
manufacturing jobs that were lost during 2000-2001 within Ohio, given
the NAICS implementation blunder by the US Department of Labor. Nevertheless, it is now known that Cuyahoga County lost 18.2%
of its manufacturing jobs between the second quarter of 2001 and the
second quarter of 2004. Cuyahoga County's loss of manufacturing jobs
during the last three years is now 19,804 jobs. Additional
manufacturing jobs were lost prior to 2Q 2001, and after 2Q 2004. But,
even given this technical constraint, the current magnitude of local
manufacturing job losses is startling and stunning. The loss of nearly
one-fifth of all high wage local manufacturing jobs in only three years
has
been a devastating blow to Cleveland. On a statewide basis, Ohio lost 17% of its manufacturing
jobs between 2001-2004, a loss of 139,705 manufacturing jobs. This has
been a catstrophic blow to the economy of the state of Ohio. It caused
soaring poverty and plunging incomes during the 2000's in Ohio, and it
caused additional job losses in other industries as the gigantic
manufacturing job losses rippled through the rest of Ohio's economy. By
far the worst losses in Ohio were in Springfield, where Clark County
has lost 32% of its manufacturing jobs since 2001. The recent loss of
one-third of all manufacturing jobs in Springfield has literally
created "depression" conditions in Springfield. Stark County (Canton)
and Lorain County (Lorain-Elyria) have also lost more than one-fifth
of their manufacturing jobs just since 2001. Even in new fourth quarter 2004 figures from the complete
count of jobs, Ohio is still not gaining manufacturing jobs during the
recovery from the 2000-2004 recession yet. That remains a very serious
problem, and it explains the reason why Ohio's economic recovery has
been so weak. First Quarter 2001-2004 Manufacturing Job "growth," 88 Ohio Counties First Quarter 2001-2004 Manufacturing Job "growth," Cleveland-Akron-Lorain-ElyriaSecond Quarter 2001-2004 Manufacturing Job "growth," 88 Ohio Counties Second Quarter 2001-2004 Manufacturing Job "growth," Cleveland-Akron-Lorain-ElyriaThird Quarter 2001-2004 Manufacturing Job "growth," 88 Ohio Counties Third Quarter 2001-2004 Manufacturing Job "growth," Cleveland-Akron-Lorain-Elyria
NEW- Fourth Quarter 2001-2004 Manufacturing Job "growth," 88 Ohio Counties NEW- Fourth Quarter 2001-2004 Manufacturing Job "growth," Cleveland-Akron-Lorain-Elyria
For much of the history of the United States, USA job growth and Ohio job growth followed very similar trends. After March 1996, that pattern changed considerably. Since March 1996, Ohio's job growth rate has been slower than the United States job growth rate during all 112 subsequent months. For the last 112 consecutive months during the last nine years (including March 1996), Ohio's job growth rate has been slower than the job growth rate in the United States as a whole. The 112 months are an all-time record for continuous sub-par job growth in Ohio. The state went into recession in December 2000, and the state continued to lose jobs in every subsequent month until the second quarter of 2004. Now that Ohio is finally generating job growth once again, its job growth still remains below the USA national average, even in the latest figures for June 2005.. 1980-2005 Job Growth in Ohio and the United States Job Growth 2000-2004, Selected Ohio Counties and State of Ohio 1990-2004 Job Growth in Cuyahoga County vs. Rest of Ohio1990-2004 Job Growth in Lorain County vs. Rest of Ohio 1990-2004 Job Growth in Summit County vs. Rest of Ohio 1990-2004 Job Growth in Cleveland-Akron-Lorain-Elyria vs. Rest of Ohio Mean Earnings of an Ohio Job Real mean earnings of a job rose by 7.1% in Ohio between 1990 and 2000. But, since 1979 they fell by -2.8%. In Cuyahoga County the average manufacturing job pays $50,582, but the average of all other nonmanufacturing jobs is $34,735. Between 2000 and 2001, during the current recession, mean real earings of a job fell by only -0.4% in Ohio. In Cuyahoga County mean earnings were virtually unchanged betweeen 2000 and 2001. Thus, economic losses from the current recession are being felt through job losses, not through a decline in the average real earnings of surviving jobs. 1979-1990-2000-2001
Mean
job earnings - Ohio counties Ohio New Claims for Unemployment Insurance Ohio's new claims for unemployment
insurance increased
by 44% in 2001, the fastest rate of increase since 1980. In 2002, new
unemployment claims slowly stabilized in comparison to 2001's soaring
levels.
Job layoffs in 2001 were considerably faster in Ohio during the winter
and early spring than they were after September 11. Slower 2002,
2003, 2004 and 2005
unemployment claim growth figures are being compared with gigantic
increases
in layoffs suffered by Ohio workers during most of 2001. Despite
some moderation in the rate of increase in layoffs, 37 of Ohio's 88
counties
are still suffered increases in their unemployment claims during 2003.
During 2004,
new unemployment
claims were lower than their very high 2003 levels in
all but seven Ohio counties. However, even in the summer of 2005, the
four
week
moving average of Cuyahoga County's new claims for unemployment
currently
remains at 1,149 every week, a level still 23% higher than the 935
workers
per week who filed claims in the first week of August 1999, before
the
current Ohio recession started. Thus, although the velocity of the
recession
has noticeably moderated recently, Cuyahoga County remained firmly
mired in the
current
recession throughout all weeks of
2004 and 2005.
The level of layoffs in Ohio's labor market
also were not consistent with a robust recovery from the
recession in January, February, March, April, May, June, July, and
August 2005
on a
statewide
basis
with 11,714 new unemployment claims during the first week of August
2005, a level still 22% higher than the pre-recession 1999
figure of 9,642 weekly new claims for unemployment in Ohio. When the
recession ends in the Cleveland labor
market, the weekly new unemployment claims will fall back to their
pre-recession 1999 levels, as job growth returns. That did not
happen during any week of 2004, or during any 2005 week yet. Statewide new claims for unemployment
fell by 5% during the first five weeks of the third quarter in 2005
in
comparison to the same figures during the first five weeks of the
third
quarter in 2004. That is an optimistic sign that is consistent with
slow renewed job growth in Ohio. But, the actual level of new
unemployment claims in Ohio remains well above 1999 pre-recession
levels.. New Unemployment Claims - Ohio's 88
Counties -
2005 New Unemployment Claims -
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain-Elyria
Metro Area 1999-2004 Week ending November 1, 2003 Time series disrupted by ODJFS Week ending October 9, 2004 Technical Note: ODJFS delayed the release of figures on new
unemployment claims for over two months, while they converted to a new
system
for administering unemployment insurance in Ohio. Thus, any measures of
whether the Ohio recession was continuing in September and October 2004
were
delayed
by the Ohio Department of Jobs and Family Services. The new system was
not available to the public for part of the week ending August 14, and
this administrative action prevented unemployed individuals from
signing up for unemployment benefits during that week, according to the
new claims figures for the week ending August 14. But, since then, a
more normal trend has emerged in the figures. New data show that a disproportional number of Ohio's new unemployment claims during the current recession are being filed by nonwhites. During 2002, although 15% of Ohio's population is nonwhite, 19.5% of Ohio's new claims for unemployment insurance were filed by nonwhites. Larger discrepancies are evident in large urban counties with large nonwhite populations such as Cuyahoga (Cleveland) and Hamilton (Cincinnati). In Cuyahoga County, 33% of the population is nonwhite, but 44% of the county's new unemployment claims in 2002 were filed by nonwhites. In Hamilton County, 27% of the population is nonwhite, but 43% of the county's new claims for unemployment in 2002 were filed by nonwhites. Although over 600,000 new claims for unemployment were filed in Ohio by white workers, nonwhite workers are suffering a disproportional burden of the current recession-caused job layoffs within Ohio. New Unemployment Claims by Race in Ohio - 2002 Cuyahoga County Sales Tax The real twelve month moving average of Cuyahoga County sales tax revenues was down for 23 consecutive months in 2001, 2002, and 2003 for the first time in twenty years. But, beginning in April 2003 this trend reversed. Between May and September 2003 the county experienced six consecutive months with real growth in its sales tax collections, even though all six of those increases were less than 1%. But, during October 2003, the trend reversed again, with sharp declines in local sales tax collections during every subsequent month through June 2004. The lengthy plunge in sales tax collections shows that the 2000-2004 recession in Cuyahoga County was significantly deeper than the 1990-1992 recession was. The most recent July 2005 Cuyahoga County sales tax figure was down by a tiny -0.3%, ending a prior streak of twelve consecutive months of growth.. 1990-2005 Graph Cuyahoga County Welfare Cuts Despite large and continuing job losses from the current recession, expiration of Ohio's three year welfare time limit caused cash welfare caseloads in Cuyahoga County to fall at a record-breaking pace for many 2001 months. The -27.8% cut in April 2001 was the fastest welfare cut of any month in the history of Cuyahoga County. The caseload continued to decline in 2002, 2003, and 2004 despite continuing local job losses during the recession. The latest one year decline in April 2005 was -4.9% from another cut of 676 families from cash welfare in Cuyahoga County, despite tens of thousands of simultaneous local job losses associated with the recession. Local welfare cuts are continuing unabated even as Cuyahoga County lost jobs during all quarters of 2004. Local cash welfare caseloads have been cut in Cuyahoga County during all 54 months of the 2000-2004 recession, while the county lost many tens of thousands of jobs. Cuyahoga County Families Cut from Welfare 1995-2005 Statewide Ohio Welfare Cuts and Job Growth Cash welfare cuts exceeded total job growth in 68 of Ohio's 88 counties during the second quarter of 2001. Cuyahoga County's OWF/TANF cash welfare caseload was cut by 5,922 families as the county simultaneously lost 18,708 jobs. 2Q 2001 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts Large OWF cash welfare cuts were common in a majority of Ohio's 88 counties during the third quarter of 2001 despite the deepening recession. In most Ohio counties, cash welfare cuts exceeded job growth. The worst example of this discrepancy was in Cuyahoga County where OWF/TANF cash welfare caseloads were cut by 5,372 families at a time when the county lost 24,385 jobs. 3Q 2001 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts Large OWF/TANF cash welfare cuts were again widespread across
Ohio during
the fourth quarter of 2001 in Ohio, despite a deepening recession that
was made worse by the aftermath of September 11. Welfare cuts continued
at a brisk pace during 4Q 2001. In 69 of Ohio's 88 counties the number
of families cut from OWF/TANF cash welfare exceeded total job growth in
the county. Thirty counties lost over 1,000 jobs, and 14 of those
counties
continued to cut their welfare caseload. The worst example of a
mismatch
between labor market trends and welfare caseload trends was once again
in Cuyahoga County, where cash welfare caseloads fell by 2,559 families
despite the loss of 33,927 jobs in the county. Large OWF cash welfare cuts continued across Ohio during the first quarter of 2002, despite the fact that the state remained in recession and continued to suffer job losses. In 71 of Ohio's 88 counties the number of families cut from OWF/TANF cash welfare exceeded total job growth in the county. 32 counties lost over 1,000 jobs during 1Q 2002, and 13 of those counties continued to cut their welfare caseload. As during previous quarters, the worst example of a mismatch between labor market trends and welfare caseload trends was in Cuyahoga County, where cash welfare caseloads were cut by 1,615 families despite the simultaneous loss of -33,062 jobs in the county. Hamilton, Montgomery, and Franklin Counties also made large cuts to their cash welfare caseloads despite the fact that those counties were losing jobs from the recession. 1Q 2002 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts Additional OWF cash welfare cuts were made in Ohio during the second quarter of 2002, despite the continuing recession that caused a loss of over 130,000 jobs in the state. In 64 of Ohio's 88 counties the number of families cut from OWF/TANF cash welfare exceeded total job growth in the county. Continuing a pattern from prior quarters, the worst mismatch between ongoing welfare cuts despite large local job losses was once again Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), where cash welfare caseloads were cut by -1,294 families despite the simultaneous -36,424 job loss within the county. Hamilton County (Cincinnati) also continued to cut its OWF/TANF cash welfare caseload despite large local job losses, but the OWF/TANF cash welfare caseload began to increase in Montgomery and Franklin Counties (Dayton and Columbus) as a result of large local job losses during the recession. 2Q 2002 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts Cash welfare cuts exceeded total job growth in 50 of Ohio's 88 counties during the third quarter of 2002. The largest discrepancy between welfare cuts and job growth in Ohio were once again in Cuyahoga County, where 1,050 families were cut from cash welfare assistance despite the simultaneous loss of -18,809 jobs in the county. As a result of the -177,647 Jobs lost in Ohio during the past year, cash welfare caseloads are actually beginning to rise in many counties, but not in Cuyahoga, where enforcement of the three year welfare time limit remains vigorous, despite the recession. Cuyahoga County has lost more jobs during the past year than any other Ohio county. The number of families simultaneously cut from cash welfare in Cuyahoga County is also larger than the same figure in any other Ohio county. 3Q 2002 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts Cash welfare cuts exceeded total job growth in 42 of Ohio's 88 counties during the fourth quarter of 2002. By far the largest discrepancy between welfare cuts and job growth were once again in Cuyahoga County, where 512 families lost their cash welfare assistance at a time when Cuyahoga Cunty lost 15,879 jobs. 4Q 2002 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts Cash welfare cuts exceeded total job growth in 52 of Ohio's 88 counties during the first quarter of 2003, despite a deepening recession in Ohio. Franklin County replaced Cuyahoga County as the largest discrepancy between welfare cuts and job losses in Ohio during 3Q 2003. But, this was only because Franklin County lost more jobs than Cuyahoga County lost during 1Q 2003.Cash welfare caseloads actually increased in 48 of Ohio's 88 counties as a result of the recession, but several large urban counties such as Hamilton and Cuyahoga vigorously enforced Ohio's 3 year time limit on cash welfare benefits, even as many thousands of jobs disappeared in those counties. 1Q 2003 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts Cash welfare cuts exceeded total job
growth in
52 of Ohio's 88 counties during the second quarter of 2003, despite a
continuing
recession in Ohio. Urban counties such as Franklin, Cuyahoga, Hamilton,
Stark, Mongtomery, and Lucas continued to suffer the largest welfare
cuts
during a period when the state lost substantial numbers of jobs. 2Q
2003 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts Cash welfare
cuts exceeded total job growth in 58 of Ohio's 88 counties during the
third quarter of 2003, despite the continuing recession in Ohio's labor
market. As had been the case in prior quarters, by far the worst
example of this was in Cuyahoga County, where the county terminated 990
families from cash welfare at the same time as Cuyahoga County lost
11,394 jobs. A karge majority of Ohio's counties saw their cash welfare
caseloads rise during the third quarter of 2003, but Cuyahoga and
Butler Counties continued to cut their large urban cash welfare
caseloads despite simultaneous large local job losses. 3Q
2003 Job
Growth
vs. Welfare Cuts During the fourth quarter of 2003,
Ohio's cash welfare
caseload actually increased by 2%, with most counties showing growth in
their number of families receiving cash welfare. But, some counties,
notably Cuyahoga County, continued to strictly enforce Ohio's three
year cash welfare time limit, despite the fact that those counties were
simultaneously losing jobs in large numbers as a result of the serious
recession in Ohio. By far the worst example of large welfare cuts
despite large simultaneous job losses was in Cuyahoga County, but
welfare cuts did exceed job gains in 53 of Ohio's 88 counties. There is
no doubt that Ohio has not been moving families from "welfare to work"
during the welfare reform process. There is no relationship between
labor market trends and welfare caseload trends in Ohio. Instead,
families are being moved "from welfare to not welfare" regardless of
whether somebody in the household has employment earnings. 4Q 2003 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts During the first quarter of 2004, Ohio's
cash welfare
caseload again increased by 1.4%, as the state remained in recession
and lost 8,193 additional jobs. Most counties experienced an increase
in their cash welfare caseload as a result of the continuing Ohio
recession. Of Ohio's 88 counties, 53 had an increase in their cash
welfare caseload during the first quarter of 2004. But, other counties,
most notably Cuyahoga County and Trumbull County, continued to strictly
enforce Ohio's three year cash welfare time limit, despite the fact
that those counties were simultaneously suffering significant job
losses from the recession. By far the worst example of large welfare
uts despite large simultaneous job losses was once again Cuyahoga
County, but welfare cuts did exceed job gains within 40 of Ohio's 88
counties. These figures show that Ohio continues to move families from
"welfare to not welfare," regardless of whether somebody in the
household has employment earnings. 1Q 2004 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts During the second quarter of 2004, Ohio
finally
stopped losing jobs on a statewide basis, although many parts of Ohio
still lost jobs duirng that period of time. The statewide cash welfare
caseload actually increased by 1,312 households, but in 37 counties
cash welfare cuts still exceeded job growth in the state. By far the
worst example of that problem was still Cuyahoga County. That county
cut its cash welfare caseload by another 856 families, despite the
simultaneous loss of an additional 8,972 jobs in the county. 2Q 2004 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts During the third quarter of 2004, Ohio
continued to
see weak job growth in the statewide economy. But, 33 counties contined
to lose jobs during the third quarter despite the end of the statewide
Ohio recession. The statewide cash welfare caseload actually increased
by 171 households, despite the period of job growth that finally
emerged in Ohio. Fourteen counties continued to cut their cash welfare
caseloads, despite job losses that continued in those counties. By far
the worst example of that was once again Cuyahoga County. In 28
counties with job growth, the cash welfare caseload rose despite the
fact that those those counties experienced simultaneous job growth.
There continued to be no relationship at all in Ohio counties between
trends in cash welfare and trends in the local labor market. Families
continue to be terminated from Ohio's cash welfare caseload, whether or
not somebody in the family has found a job. 3Q
2004 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts NEW- During the fourth quarter of 2004, Ohio continued to
see weak job growth in the statewide economy. But, 30 Ohio counties
still lost jobs at the end of 2004. The statewide Ohio cash welfare
caseload fell by 223 households, but all of that was accounted for by
Cuyahoga County alone, where 1,036 households lost their cash welfare
benefits. The caseload actually rose in the rest of Ohio outside
Cuyahoga County. 4Q 2004 was another quarter in a long series of
quarters where there was no relationship at all between local labor
market conditions and trends in the Ohio cash welfare caseload.
Cuyahoga, Montgomery, and Trumbull counties all cut their cash welfare
caseload substantiallly despite the fact that they simultaneously lost
more than 1,000 jobs in the local economy. 4Q
2004 Job Growth vs. Welfare Cuts Since 1994 Cuyahoga County's welfare benefits have been cut by $329 million annually. DATA CEOGC Summary of Current Economic Trends Additional data and information not on this web site are available from CEOGC via gzeller@ceogc.org |