|
PAGE 33
<br />UNEMPLOYMENT
<br />RATE (%)
<br />MEDIAN
<br />HOUSEHOLD INCOME
<br />Dublin 3.7 $171,168
<br />Livermore 3.3 $139,904
<br />Pleasanton 4.0 $167,932
<br />Tri-Valley 3.6 $150,427
<br />Alameda
<br />County
<br />5.0 $112,017
<br />California 6.5 $84,097
<br />Table 11. Unemployment Rate and Median Household Income by Location
<br />Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
<br />Note: Percentages in column 1 reflect the total civilian labor force
<br />age 16 and over that is unemployed in each area. Percentages
<br />in columns 3 and 4 reflect the area’s total population for whom
<br />poverty status is determined. Parenthetical numbers are counts of
<br />individuals in each category.
<br />BELOW 100%
<br />FEDERAL POVERTY
<br />LEVEL
<br />BELOW 200%
<br />FEDERAL POVERTY
<br />LEVEL
<br />Dublin 3.7 (2,501)7.6 (5,234)
<br />Livermore 4.0 (3,502)11.5 (10,134)
<br />Pleasanton 4.8 (3,834)8.7 (6,895)
<br />Tri-Valley 4.2 9.6
<br />Alameda
<br />County
<br />8.9 19.4
<br />California 12.3 28.5
<br />Table 12. Federal Poverty Level by Location
<br />Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017–2021
<br />Note: Percentages in columns 1 and 2 reflect the area’s total
<br />population for whom poverty status is determined. Parenthetical
<br />numbers are individuals in each category.
<br />% FPL 0%100%150%200%
<br />HO
<br />U
<br />S
<br />E
<br />H
<br />O
<br />L
<br />D
<br />
<br />S
<br />I
<br />Z
<br />E
<br />1 $0 $14,580 $21,870 $29,160
<br />2 $0 $19,720 $29,580 $39,440
<br />3 $0 $24,860 $37,290 $49,720
<br />4 $0 $30,000 $45,000 $60,000
<br />5 $0 $35,140 $52,710 $70,280
<br />6 $0 $40,280 $60,420 $80,560
<br />7 $0 $45,420 $68,130 $90,840
<br />8 $0 $50,560 $75,840 $101,120
<br />add’l, add $0 $5,140 $7,710 $10,280
<br />Table 13. Income Cutoffs for
<br />Federal Poverty Level by Household Size
<br />Source: Covered California,
<br />https://www.coveredca.com/pdfs/FPL-chart.pdf
<br />When comparing 100% and 200% FPL, the key
<br />difference lies in the income threshold: 100% FPL
<br />is the baseline measure and means that a person’s
<br />or a family’s income is at the threshold defined as
<br />poverty for their household size; 200% FPL indicates
<br />an income level that is twice the baseline. The
<br />income cutoffs for households of different sizes are
<br />enumerated in Table 13.
<br />The poverty level in the Tri-Valley is half that of the
<br />county (4.2% compared to 8.9% of the population)
<br />and just one-third that of the state (12.3%). The
<br />region also has a relatively low unemployment rate:
<br />3.6% in the Tri-Valley compared to 5% in Alameda
<br />County and 6.5% in California overall (Table 12).
<br />Figure 21 shows more recent unemployment statistics
<br />reported by the California Employment Development
<br />Department. The spike in unemployment in all three
<br />municipalities in 2020 is directly attributable to the
<br />COVID-19 pandemic. Unemployment rates in the
<br />region have not returned to their pre-pandemic
<br />levels, but even so they remain significantly lower
<br />than unemployment at the county and state levels.
<br />As seen in Figure 22, the median household income
<br />is more than $160,000 in almost half of the census
<br />block groups in the Tri-Valley, nearly double the state
<br />median household income (Table 11). The gap in
<br />median household income between the Tri-Valley and
<br />the state is projected to increase over the next 5 to 7
<br />years (Figure 23).
<br />Median household income can be somewhat
<br />misleading, however. Using different measures
<br />and disaggregating the data illustrates that some
<br />regions and populations of the Tri-Valley are more
<br />economically disadvantaged than others. The FPL
<br />accounts for cost of living, so it is a more robust
<br />measure of poverty than median household income.
<br />Figure 24 shows the proportion of the population in
<br />each census block group that is below the FPL.
<br />Table 14 shows the racial breakdown of people living
<br />in poverty in each municipality as of 2021. One would
<br />expect the poverty rate for each group to roughly
<br />align with its proportion of the total population. For
<br />example, if white people account for 25% of the
<br />population in a place, one might expect that 25%
<br />of the impoverished population in that same place
<br />would be white. If the rate is substantially higher or
<br />EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS Page 91 of 554
|