Mapping Poverty Alachua County, Florida

Map provided By PennyWise Realty

Purposes of Our Study

• To explore patterns of poverty within Alachua County using specific poverty indicators

• To Implement ARCGIS and ARCMAP programs to present a spatial analysis of this data.

• To present this data in a spatial format to aid in decision making process for striving toward reduced poverty in the county

Alachua County

• Located in North Central Florida

• Population of approximately 223, 578

• 24% of population living below the poverty level

• Includes the cities of Alachua, Archer, Gainesville, Hawthorne, High Springs, La Crosse, Micanopy, Newberry, and Waldo.

Gainesville

Newberry

High Springs

Alachua

Archer

Waldo

La Crosse

Hawthorne

Micanopy

0 11,000 22,0005,500Meters

4

Legend

Cities

Alachua County

Alachua County

Poverty Indicators

• We looked at three variables we feel are linked to poverty.

1. Economic Indicators

2. Sociodemographic Indicators

3. Vulnerability Indicators

Economic Poverty Indicator

• We determined an economic indicator of poverty by using the established census bureau guidelines and then creating 3 levels of High, Medium and Low Poverty based on aggregated income levels and household income using established census block groups.

Economic Poverty Levels

• High Poverty :Income $10,000 – 13,999

• Medium Poverty:Income $ 14, 000 -16, 999

• Low Poverty: Income $ 17,000- 20, 000

0 11,000 22,0005,500Meters

4

Legend

Income Range 10,000-20,00010,000-13,999

14,000-16,999

17,000-20,999

Alachua County

Economic Ranges of Poverty in Alachua County

Socioeconomic Indicator

• We explored the relationship between poverty and key ethnic groups to look for suggestive trends.

0 0.05 0.10.025Decimal Degrees

4

Legend

HISPANIC

HISP4-102

107-194

263-300

307-403

493-532

646-719

Distribution of Hispanics in Alachua County

0 8,250 16,5004,125Meters

4

Legend

Income Range 10,000-20,00010,000-13,999

14,000-16,999

17,000-20,999

alachua_county_boundary

Economic Ranges of Poverty in Alachua County

High poverty rates tend to correspond with high Hispanic population abundance

0 0.05 0.10.025Decimal Degrees

4

Legend

BLACK

BLK3-306

333-650

735-1059

1111-1435

1477-2240

Distribution of African Americans in Alachua County

0 8,250 16,5004,125Meters

4

Legend

Income Range 10,000-20,00010,000-13,999

14,000-16,999

17,000-20,999

alachua_county_boundary

Economic Ranges of Poverty in Alachua County

Medium poverty rates tend to correspond with medium African American population abundance

0 0.05 0.10.025Decimal Degrees

4

Legend

WHITE

WHT20-917

938-1720

1904-2656

2816-3514

4088-4795

4980-6447

Distribution of Whites in Alachua County

0 8,250 16,5004,125Meters

4

Legend

Income Range 10,000-20,00010,000-13,999

14,000-16,999

17,000-20,999

alachua_county_boundary

Economic Ranges of Poverty in Alachua County

Low poverty rates tend to correspond with high Caucasian population abundance except inSW Gainesville

Socioeconomic Indicator

• We also looked at education levels as they relate to poverty.

0 0.06 0.120.03

Decimal Degrees

4

Legend

White Females 9-12 No Diploma

FWhitenone

low

medium

high

Distribution of White Females With No Diploma0 0.06 0.120.03Decimal Degrees

4

Legend

White Males 9-12 No Diploma

Males_NHSnone

low

middle

high

Distribution of White Males With No Diploma

0 0.06 0.120.03Decimal Degrees

4

Legend

Hisp. Males 9-12 No Diploma

MHispnone

low

medium

high

Distribution of Hispanic Males With No Diploma

0 0.06 0.120.03Decimal Degrees

4

Legend

Hisp. Females 9-12 No Diploma

FHispnone

low

medium

high

Distribution of Hispanic Females With No Diploma

0 0.06 0.120.03

Decimal Degrees

4

Legend

AA Females 9-12 No Diploma

FAfricaAmenone

low

medium

high

Distribution of African American Females With No Diploma0 0.06 0.120.03

Decimal Degrees

4

Legend

AA Males

AfricanAmenone

low

medium

high

Distribution of African American Males With No Diploma

Socioeconomic Indicator

• There are less individuals receiving diplomas in rural areas

• Suggests that social programs should be extended to these areas to ensure high school completion

Vulnerability Indicator

• We chose to look at two types of vulnerability indicators; environmental vulnerability and availability to services vulnerability.

Availability to Services Vulnerability

• Those factors we considered important include presence of fire departments, hospitals, schools, transit routes and sewer. These factors contribute to social poverty by making it difficult for individuals in areas where there are fewer available services. A reduced access to services means reduced opportunities and increased safety risks.

Environmental Vulnerability

• Environmental vulnerability factors contribute to an impoverished circumstance for those individuals living in areas because they influence the quality of air, water and soil. They influence the kind of risks to which people in these areas are exposed. By extension, this may further depress the economics of areas if individuals exposed to contaminants become sick and do not have adequate if any insurance to cover medical expenses.

Environmental Vulnerability

• The factors we considered to be significant include location of hazardous waste sites, sewage treatment plants and pipe placements, solid waste sites and superfund sites.

!(

d dddd d d

dddddd

ddd d dd dd dd dd d

dddddddddd

kjkj

kjkjkjkj

kj

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(

!( !(!( !(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

0 11,000 22,0005,500Meters

4

Legend

!( hazardous_waste

kj sewage_treatment

d solid_waste

!( superfund

sewer

Income Range 10,000-20,00010,000-13,999

14,000-16,999

17,000-20,999

Alachua County

Placement of Environmental Risk Factors Compared with Economic Income

In Conclusion

• Most impoverished areas in Alachua fall within the rural areas outside of city boundaries and within Gainesville boundaries in the North East area of the city.

• Most services found within urbanized areas and less in rural

In Conclusion

• Hazardous waste sites predominately in lower sociodemographic regions within city boundaries while sewage treatment plants are more equally distributed throughout Alachua

• Superfund site located in Gainesville boundaries within one of the poorest communities