Indiana posted biggest population gain since 2008

(9/1)

U.S. POPULATION, MIGRATION & GROWTH TRENDS

Requires subscription.

INDIANA POPULATION & MIGRATION

Benefiting from a decline in net domestic out-migration, Indiana’s 2017 population gain was the best

since 2008. Driven by a declining birth rate and an aging population Indiana’s population growth was,

however, below the prior decade according to the latest population estimates by the Census Bureau.

Given the state’s industrial and rural composition, it is not surprising to see the majority of growth

currently driven by select metro communities - particularly Indianapolis - and wide growth disparity at

the county level.

With 6.7 million Hoosiers, Indiana was the nation’s 17 th most populous state in 2017.

The 32,800 resident increase ranked Indiana as the 19 th fastest growing state in 2017 on a numeric

basis and 25 th based on the 0.5% growth rate.

The 176,800 resident increase ranked Indiana as the 20 st fastest growing state over the 2010-2017

period on a numeric basis and 31 st based on the 2.7% growth rate.

Indiana’s state level net domestic out-migration was -916 in 2017, an improvement from -10,480 in 2016

and -14,675 in 2015. The net domestic out-migration in 2017 generated a state ranking of 26 th while

the -54,800 net domestic out-migration over the 2011-2017 period produced a ranking of 36 th

While generally not a primary driver of economic health, international immigration is still important.

Netting out the positive 70,900 international in-migration, Indiana’s total net in-migration was a positive

16,100 over the 2011-2017 period, ranking the state 32 nd . Without the academically fueled

international in-migration, the state’s net migration would not have been positive.

As a barometer of economic growth, community health and desirability, the population change

applicable to net domestic migration is a very important dynamic. While they may have turned the

migration corner, state and local officials may wish to consider more outcomes based strategies that

develop local jobs, local talent and attract skilled talent via domestic migration rather than limiting

their focus to new corporate location business.

The same applies to talent retention, community visibility, imagery and helping communities distinguish

themselves. While the state has done a stellar job positioning for new location business, community Based on what the state has to offer, Indiana has an opportunity to reverse their net domestic out-

migration, but it hasn’t happened yet. The positive net migration experienced by some of Indiana’s

metro areas is the result of in-state migration, not in-migration from outside the state. Other Midwest

cities with growing populations and good economies are experiencing the same.

Full employment is no walk in the park for growing businesses. For more on how to leverage human

capital, including prioritizing home grown jobs, developing local talent, the efficient use of tax resources

and strategies for improving net domestic migration, see the appropriate sections in this release.

While not yet recognized, the nation’s migratory patterns are in the process of changing. As a result, the

potential to attract individual talent, capture new business and grow population via net domestic in-

migration should not be under estimated.

As you can see, Indiana’s net domestic out-migration loss of -54,800 over the 2011-2017 period was in

sharp contrast to the 1, 015,000, 916,000, 307,000, 275,00 and 270,000 net domestic in-migration

gains experienced by Florida, Texas, N. Carolina, Arizona and Colorado over the same period.

Emphasizing the importance of net domestic migration, ALEC’s 11 th edition of Rich States, Poor States

awarded Indiana a high #3 listing on their forward looking Economic Outlook Rankings and a low #39

listing on their backward looking Economic Performance Rankings.

While some question the methodology, the poor ranking for Economic Performance was primarily due

to the state’s net domestic out-migration. The right to work and tax advantages were primarily

responsible for the high Economic Outlook ranking.

INDIANA METRO COMMUNITIES: Indianapolis on a Roll

Benefiting from improved net domestic migration, more than half the state’s metros, i.e., 21 of 36,

gained population in 2017 while 17 gained over the 2010 - 2017 period. The 21 metro gain in

population during 2017 was up from 18 in 2016 and 15 in 2017.

Indiana has ten metro areas with population over 100,000 and six over 200,000. With a population of

2,029,000, the Indianapolis metro was the largest in the state and the nation’s 34 th largest metro in

2017. The state’s other large metro areas include Ft. Wayne (435,000), South Bend (322,000), Evansville

(316,000), Lafayette (219,000) and Elkhart (205,000).

The 23,000 numeric increase by Indianapolis dominated all other Indiana metros in 2017. On a numeric

basis, Indianapolis was the nation’s 27 th fastest growing metro in 2017. The 136,000 increase ranked

Indianapolis as the nation’s 29 th fastest growing metro over the 2010 - 2017 period.

On a percent growth basis, Lafayette (8.5%), Indianapolis (7.2%), Columbus (6.8%) and Bloomington

(4.8%) were the fastest growing large metros over the 2010 - 2017 period. Of the ten fastest growing

metros, only five were among the largest.

The forward looking Area Development report on the 2018 Leading Metro Locations highlighted the

growth in California, the lifestyle driven Pacific Northwest and the Mountain States. While not yet

confirmed by the backward looking Census Bureau data, they also noted growth outliers in the non-

monolithic Midwest, like Elkhart-Goshen and Columbus.

Known for architecture, art, beautification, regional low unemployment and a high average wage rate,

Columbus is another metro with potential. Area Development also mentioned their revitalization, tax

incentives, law enforcement and perhaps most important, the ability to attract an educated workforce.

Based on the 7.2% percent growth, Indianapolis was 22 nd among the nation’s fastest growing metros

over 2,000,000 during the 2010-2017 period and 29 th among those over 1,000,000. Leading the pack

and adding 388,000 residents, the comparatively sized Austin grew at a 22.5% rate over the 2010-2017

period.

While half the state’s metro communities grew population in 2017 and over the 2010-2017 period, only

seven benefited from net domestic in-migration in 2017 while three benefited over the 2011-2017

period. Unlike the state level data, the metro and county data from the Census Bureau does not

breakout interstate and intrastate migration.

Gaining 7,800 in 2017 and 30,400 over the 2011-2017 period, the Indianapolis metro was by far the

primary beneficiary of net domestic in-migration. Indianapolis was also the state’s only “large” metro

benefiting from net domestic migration over the 2011-2017 period.

While the eleven county Indianapolis-Carmel-Anderson metro accounted for only 30% of the state’s

population, the Indianapolis metro was responsible for 70% of the state’s population growth in 2017

and 77% over the 2010-2017 period.

INDIANA COUNTIES: Hamilton County Strutting Like a Showgirl

More than half, i.e., 55 of 92, of the state’s counties gained population in 2017 while only 33 gained over

the 2010 - 2017 period. The 55 county gain in population during 2017 was up from 45 in 2016 and 36 in

2015.

While 38 of Indiana’s 92 counties benefited from net domestic in-migration during 2017, only 10

benefited from meaningful net domestic in-migration during the 2011-2017 period. The 38 county gain

in net domestic in-migration in 2017 was up from 22 in 2016 and 19 in 2015.

Indiana has 17 counties with population over 100,000 and 6 over 200,000. With population of 944,034

and 485,640, Marion and Lake are the largest. Other large counties include Allen (372,877), Hamilton

(323,747), St. Joseph (270,434) and Elkhart (204,146).

In both 2017 and the 2010-2017 period, the Indianapolis doughnut counties of Hamilton (17.1%), Boone

(15.8%), Hendricks (12.2%), Johnson (9.7%) and Hancock (6.8%) were among the fastest growing. The

doughnut counties also dominated the net domestic in-migration gains for both periods.

Other fast growing counties outside the Indianapolis metro area over the 2010-2017 period included

Tippecanoe (10.1%), Bartholomew (6.8%) Monroe (6.1%) and Clark (5.8%).

With 324,000 residents, Hamilton County is the state’s 4 th largest county. Hamilton is also the fastest

growing county in the Indianapolis metro community and the state. Hamilton’s 17.1% growth from

2010 - 2017 was fueled by the swelling populations in the upscale suburban cities of Fishers and Carmel.

If we look at the nation’s 225 largest counties with a population over 300,000, Hamilton’s 17.1% growth

rate over the 2010 - 2017 period ranked the county 16 th . If we look at the 15 counties besting Hamilton,

six were in Texas and four were in Florida. Virginia, S. Carolina, Tennessee, Colorado and N. Carolina

each had one in the top fifteen. As noted, the migration patterns in Texas and Florida are changing.

Marion is the largest county in the state and the Indianapolis metro area. While Marion County gained

6,048 residents in 2017, it also experienced net domestic out-migration of -3,527 in 2017 and -21,243

over the 2011-2017 period. Followed by Lake County, Marion’s net domestic out-migration was larger

than any other Indiana county for both periods.

CITIES: Westfield, Fishers & Carmel Leapfrogging Ahead

Indiana has ten cities with a population over 70,000. Seven of the ten largest cities gained population in

2017 and the 2010-2017 period.

The cities ranged from Indianapolis (863,000) and Ft. Wayne (266,000) at the top to Lafayette (72,390),

the tenth largest. Carmel (92,198) ranked 5 th and Fishers (91,832) was right behind at sixth. Compared

to the rest of the nation, Indianapolis was the 16 th largest city while Ft. Wayne ranked 78 th .

Leading the percent growth pack among the largest cities, Fishers population grew 2.1% in 2017 while

Carmel grew 1.5%. Increasing by 18.0% and 15.6% respectively, Fishers and Carmel were by far

Indiana’s fastest growing large cities over the 2010 - 2017 period when measured by percent growth.

On a numeric basis, the Indianapolis gain of 41,529 led the pack over the 2010 - 2017 period. Fishers

was 2 nd with an increase of 14,030 and Carmel was 3 rd with an increase of 12,431 over the same

2010 - 2017 period.

Fishers and Carmel are both contributing to the Hamilton County growth, the state’s 4 th largest county.

Increasing by 47,271, Hamilton was the fastest growing Indiana County on a numeric and percent

growth basis over the 2010-2017 period.

Given that people don’t live in states, metros or counties, but rather cities, towns and villages, let’s take

a more granular view. If we drop down to Indiana cities with a population over 25,000, Westfield (39.5),

Plainfield (32.9), Noblesville (61.9), Zionsville (26.7) and Brownsburg (25.9) all exceeded Fishers 2.1%

growth in 2017 while all but Zionsville exceeded Fishers 18.0% growth over the 2010-2017 period.

With a population of 39,500, Westfield dominated the population growth of cities in excess of 25,000

in 2017 (5.3%) and over the 2010 - 2017 period (30.7%). All five of these fast growing cities were in the

Indianapolis metro area.

DEMOGRAPHIC OUTLOOK THRU 2050: Growth Driven By a Handful of Metros While 65% of the

Counties Shrink

Fueled by a small number of metro communities, Indiana’s population will continue to grow, but at a

slower pace when compared to prior decades.

Based on recent projections from the Indiana Business Research Center (IBRC), the state’s population

will rise from 6.67 million in 2017 to 7.27 by 2050. The 600,000 resident increase reflects a 9% growth

rate from 2017.

The 11 county Indianapolis metro area will continue as the state’s primary source of population

growth thru 2050.

The Indianapolis Metro population is expected to grow to 2.51 million by 2050, a 24% increase from

2017’s 2.03 million. As the area adds 500,000 residents, its share of state population will rise to 35%.

Hamilton County will lead the Indianapolis Metro growth - and the state - with a 200,000 + increase,

up 63% from 2017. Hamilton will also no doubt surpass Allen and Lake County to become the state’s

second biggest county by 2050. The other doughnut counties, Boone, Hendricks, Johnson and Hancock

are expected to increase by one-third.

The two largest counties, Marion and Allen, are expected to increase by 14% and 18% respectively.

Looking at the state’s 12 largest counties, Lake is the only large county projected to decline.

Looking beyond Central Indiana, Tippecanoe, Daviess, Monroe, Clark, Elkhart and Switzerland are other

counties expected to grow by 20% thru 2050.

Increasing over the last two years, 55 counties gained population in 2017 while 33 gained over the 2010

- 2017 period. Negating the three year trend, the IBRC projects that only 33 counties will experience

population growth thru 2050. In other words, 59 counties - representing 65% of the total - are

projected to lose population thru 2050.

As you can see, the state’s slow growth will continue, but there will be a wide disparity among the

counties. Indeed, the growth among a small number of metro communities and the decline of a large

number of mid-sized and rural communities is somewhat disheartening.

The 65+ older population will increase from today’s 15% of total state population to near 21% by 2035.

Given the flat birth rate and the rising death rate, the state’s natural increase will decline. Based on the

IBRC projections, population outside the metro areas for mid-sized counties is expected to decline by 6%

while rural communities will decline by 9%.

Because the majority of projections are based on the natural increase/decrease, net domestic migration

remains the wild card.

DEMISE OF THE AMERICAN/INDIANA FARMER

The U.S. farmer has been losing export market share for decades. The farm problem goes way beyond

the current trade war, the Chinese incentivizing competitors, declining farm income and the huge drop

in July farm exports and prices.

Currency fluctuations, cheap & available land, a longer growing season, farm friendly government

policies and huge infrastructural investments have all played a role. While the Russians and Brazilians

invested heavily in their export infrastructure, Midwest farmers face a broken down lock and dam

system that strains reliability.

In short, once the world’s break basket, the US farmer is now struggling for a seat at the table. Given

that these dynamics are not going to be reversed, it’s time for state policymakers to step up and develop

other sources of growth and employment for the farm community. The new NAFTA deal is a positive,

but subsidies, crutches and a Soviet-type economy are not a solution.

Sadly, the declining rural community population projections by the IBRC could be under stated. The

impact of the trade/tariff war - including retaliation - on Indiana’s economy and employment is

unknown, but the damage could be meaningful. Beyond the agricultural impact, it could also impact

jobs that use imported steel. Indiana employs more than 20 percent of the nation’s steel workers and

has the highest share of jobs using imported steel.

As you can see, Indiana is in need of successful growth strategies beyond the large metro areas.

Fortunately, there is much state officials can do to chart their own course. To explore how Indiana could

alter the county disparity, see Improving Net Domestic Migration.

The full report will discuss them in detail, but one of the strategies includes leveraging the out-migration

from the fiscally impaired Illinois at multiple levels, Indiana’s natural and neighboring market. Texas was

very successful in targeting high tax, high regulation and anti-business states. Given the favorable tax,

regulatory, cost and infrastructural environment, there is no reason Indiana can’t do the same.

While the “Illinoyed and “Illinoying” campaigns made sense, Indiana has not yet connected at the

individual level re net domestic migration, i.e., the bottom line. Lower taxes, less costly workers

compensation and a lower cost of doing business are great, but real success lies in convincing skilled

labor Indiana is a good place to live.

Individuals, i.e., age, income, education & needs, move for different reasons, but jobs, housing and

family generally drive intrastate relocation. Based on the 2016 ASC data, 801,000 residents moved

internally within the state of Indiana in 2016 while gross in-migration from other states totaled 146,000.

As the state’s largest source of domestic in-migration, 29,900 residents from Illinois moved to Indiana on

a gross basis during 2016.

While not related to the farm community, Illinois students have increasingly opted for higher education

in other states. Alarmed over the budget stalemate, the rising costs were too concerning. The state’s

reputation for being too expensive precluded many from even applying. Targeting these students,

including ongoing interface to retain them, is another strategy Indiana should be pursuing.

Based on their latest Corruption in Illinois report, the UIC ranked Chicago as the nation’s most corrupt

city and Illinois as the third most corrupt state. Given the decades of corruption and poor fiscal

management, Illinois and Chicago are a simmering pot of conflicting dynamics. However, as validated

by the construction cranes and Site Selection Magazine, the downtown Chicago Loop, West Loop and

River North are among the nation’s most dynamic metro areas. The economic vibrancy and location also

helps Chicago capture large corporate investments.

FISCAL HEALTH

The fiscal health of public pension plans vary by state, plan and year. Data on these plans also vary by

source and methodology.

Based on the 2017 Unaccountable & Unaffordable report by ALEC, Indiana was ranked as the second

healthiest state in terms of pension liabilities per capita. Connecticut, Illinois and New Jersey were

ranked among the least healthy, three states losing meaningful population to net domestic out-

migration.

While more difficult to estimate than unfunded pension liabilities, Other Post-Employment Benefit

liabilities (healthcare) are often viewed as the elephant in the room. Complementing their ranking of the

state’s unfunded pension liabilities, the ALEC ranking of Indiana’s OPED liabilities was among the most

favorable. The state’s disclosure was also singled out as superior.

Looking beyond unfunded liabilities, determining the true health of a state’s fiscal condition is a difficult

task. Further complementing the seemingly healthy status of the state’s unfunded pension and

healthcare liabilities, the Mercatus Center ranked Indiana 16 th for overall fiscal health.

While not predictable, economic cycles are a reality. Based on stress testing of the states by Moody’s

Analytics, Indiana ranks as one of the states most prepared for the next economic downtown.

Indiana’s bond ratings by the leading services, including Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch, are

among the highest.

In addition to the growing out-migration fueled by poor fiscal health, capping the SALT tax deduction

will further increase out-migration from fiscally poor high tax states like NY, CA, CT, NJ & IL.

Going forward, taxpayers in low tax states like Indiana will no longer be subsiding wealthier residents in

high tax states like Illinois (32 percent increase in the personal income tax rate last year). Rather than

attempting to game the system with workarounds and continuously raise taxes to fund their 7,000

different government units, union officials and public pension promises that can’t be met, IL and other

high tax states would be wise to address their core problems.

State and local governments exist to provide services, not tax their residents into economic slavery and

involuntary servitude. Requiring an ever shrinking tax base to continually pay more for less services,

failed policies and benefits they don’t personally receive is not a sustainable path. It is, however, a

migratory path.

The states losing the most to net domestic out-migration between over the 2011 - 2017 period were

NY -1,000,000, IL -630,000, CA -536,000 and NJ -387,000. Going forward, fiscal health, taxes and

environmental concerns are destined to play a much bigger role in location decisions. Given their fiscal

stability and predictability, Indiana could capture an increasing share of out-migration with the right

strategies at the individual level.

BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT

Similar to the endless string of articles/lists about the best places to live or retire, the state business

environment rankings are all over the map. Indeed, some strain credibility, including WalletHub’s

ranking of California as the 2 nd best business environment.

USA Today, US News, WalletHub, Chief Executive, CNBC and Area Development are some of the sources

that rank business environments by state. As you might guess, their methodologies are quite different,

assuming they provide information explaining them. With each favoring Indiana, Forbes, Site Selection

Magazine, Business Facilities Magazine, Pollina Real Estate and Area Development also provide business

climate rankings.

CNBC and Chief Executive seem to be the sources states champion the most and while we like the CNBC

methodology, Chief Executive comes the closest to mirroring net domestic migration. In our minds,

net domestic migration is the best overall barometer of community health and desirability.

Chief Executive uses a survey based approach focusing on three areas, Taxes & Regulations, Workforce

Quality and Living Environment. In contrast, CNBC methodology uses 64 metrics across 10 categories. In

other words, they claim to measure actual performance.

While WalletHub, CNBC and Chief Executive all ranked Texas #1 that is where the similarity ends.

Indiana’s overall ranking was 33 rd , 16 th and 5 th respectively. Florida was ranked 6 th , 10 th and 2 nd while

N. Carolina was ranked 12 th , 3 rd and 9 th . Texas, Florida and N. Carolina are the states benefiting the most

from net domestic migration.

Taking a deeper dive into the CNBC analytics, Indiana was ranked highly in the infrastructure, cost of

doing business, business friendly and cost of living categories. Indiana’s quality of life was, however,

ranked near the bottom while their education rank was below average. Chief Executive’s view of Indiana livability was more positive. They also highlighted Indiana’s business

friendly environment, tax rates, regulations, growing workforce and affordability in their Five States to

Watch release.

In summary, some of the business ranking services can be useful and provide good background

information. We would, however, not take any as gospel because rankings may not translate into new

business.

TAX ENVIRONMENT

The economy is characterized by mobile capital and labor. Taxes are important, but still only one

variable in the decision making process. Nevertheless, states with the most attractive tax systems are best

positioned to generate new business, stimulate economic growth and employment. Unlike other structural

initiatives, changes to the tax code can have an immediate impact.

In spite of globalization, the toughest competition often emanates from other states rather than other

countries. As a result, state officials are and should be concerned how their states compare to the

competition, including neighboring business climates and other states. Tax competition is an unpleasant

reality for budget officials, but it is an effective restraint on state and local taxes. When a state imposes

higher taxes than a neighboring state, it also encourages businesses to relocate.

While state officials are mindful of their business tax climates, they are sometimes tempted to lure

business with lucrative tax incentives and subsidies rather than broad-based tax reform. Based on

numerous examples, this can be a dangerous proposition. In other words, long term job creation and

economic development is best served by the business tax climate rather than incentives.

To compare the states and determine their overall ranking, the Tax Foundation Index uses more than one

hundred variables in five major areas of taxation, including corporate taxes, individual income taxes, sales

taxes, unemployment insurance taxes and property taxes. The methodology results in an overall score

than can be compared to other states.

Based on the 2018 State Business Tax Climate Index as produced by the Tax Foundation, the most

competitive states are Wyoming, S. Dakota, Alaska, Florida, Nevada, Montana, New Hampshire, Utah,

Indiana and Oregon. The least competitive are New Jersey, New York, California, Vermont, Minnesota,

Ohio, Connecticut, Maryland, Louisiana and Rhode Island.

The table below compares Indiana’s overall ranking of 9 with neighboring states only. A rank of 1 is

the best while 50 is the worst.

Individual Income Unemployment

Overall Corporate Tax Tax Sales Tax Insurance Property Tax

Indiana 9 23 10 9 10 4

Michigan 12 8 14 11 48 21

Illinois 29 36 16 35 42 45

Kentucky 33 27 29 14 47 36

Georgia 36 10 42 28 38 23

Wisconsin 38 29 43 7 40 26

Iowa 40 48 33 19 34 39 When looking at the overall tax rankings from the Tax Foundation, note that the states with the highest

taxes, NJ, NY and CA, are also the states losing the most population to net domestic out-migration.

Based on data from ALEC and Mercatus, two of the states with the highest taxes, NJ and CT, are also

saddled with the worst fiscal health and unfunded pension liabilities. To their credit, IL currently has a

flat tax rate and while the state does not have the highest taxes, the land of Lincoln has the nation’s

worst fiscal health. IL is also bleeding net domestic out-migration.

Beyond the being the third biggest loser to net domestic out-migration from 2010-2017, IL was the only

highly populated state to lose population in 2017. At the city level, Chicago was the only city with a

population over 700,000 to lose population in 2017. The population declined at the county and metro

level as well.

For those looking for evidence that high taxes and poor fiscal health have a meaningful impact on

residents voting with their feet, this data validates the observation.

Highest Net

Highest Taxes Worst Fiscal Health Domestic Out-Migration

New Jersey (1) Illinois (1) New York (1)

New York (2) New Jersey (2) Illinois (2)

California (3) Connecticut (3) California (3)

Connecticut (7) New Jersey (4)

Connecticut (8)

INFRASTRUCTURE

Requires subscription

WORKFORCE

Requires subscription.

MIDWEST/INDIANA GROWTH OUTLOOK

Requires subscription.

HOUSING AVAILABILITY & AFFORDABILITY

Requires subscription.

USING TAX RESOURCES EFFECTIVELY

Requires subscription.

PRIORITIZING HOME GROWN JOBS

Requires subscription.

DEVELOPING & RETAINING LOCAL TALENT

Requires subscription.

IMPROVING NET DOMESTIC MIGRATION

Requires subscription.

ALTERING THE DECLINE OF SMALL & RURUAL COMMUNITIES

Requires subscription

QUALITY OF LIFE

Requires subscription.

INCREASING VISIBILITY, IMAGE ENHANCEMENT & COMMUNITY MARKETING

Requires subscription.

U.S. & INDIANA DEMOGRAPHIC/MIGRATION TABLES

In addition to population and growth, the tables cover domestic migration at the state, metro, county

and city level.

__________________________

ABOUT DATA ANALYTICS ILLINOIS

Accessing dependable, relevant and useable data has become increasingly important to the decision making of individuals and

businesses, particularly when the economy and/or demographics are changing. Data can, however, be overwhelming.

In conjunction with ProximityOne, Data Analytics of Illinois is developing an interactive Data Analytics Center website that

reorganizes, integrates and provides access to public domain and other valuable private data on a granular basis.

ProximityOne has extensive experience providing solutions for accessing and analyzing multi-sourced federal geographic,

demographic, economic and business data. Beyond geodemographic expertise, they have developed digital map databases,

GIS software, web-based interactive tables/data and demographic-economic projections. The Data Analytics staff has three

decades of experience providing competitive intelligence to the financial services industry, including the largest banks,

insurance companies, mutual fund companies, trust companies, brokerage firms and retirement plan recordkeepers.

By successfully linking organized and pertinent geographic, demographic and economic data - including the Census Bureau,

Bureau of Labor Statistics & Bureau of Economic Analysis - our Geostatistical data is more accessible and usable than the data

released by the Census Bureau and other Federal agencies.

To facilitate informed decision making and empower users, the new, unique and distinguishing resource will include projections

and private data. The projections include Census Tract Demographic/Economic Estimates & Projections. County up estimates

and projections are also available.

Home affordability and the cost of living are key variables for all Americans, including those considering relocation. While we

use the public domain’s broad FHFA Home Price Index (HPI) and the BLS CPI, we can also pull from the census tracts and the

ACS.

Similar to home affordability, regional and small area employment is important to households, businesses and policy makers.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) releases data on Job Openings & Labor Turnover monthly at the national and regional level,

but does not produce state or sub-state estimates. To further empower users, ProximityOne, Is already developing

experimental projections by state, metro and county. The BEA is expected to release its first ever county estimates of GDP later

in the year, another variable we plan to integrate.

Others have certainly repackaged data, but Data Analytics IL will be the only website resource linking demographic,

geographic, economic and private data - including client data - that is pertinent, reliable, updated, convenient, organized,

usable and interactive.

Going forward, new variables will play a significant role in domestic migration. The impact on the housing market and local

economies will be significant, including the rise of new business leading metros and the demise of others. With emphasis on

the future, high quality data and projections second to none, our forward looking commentary will be out in front of these

trends.

The integrated data will provide insight into where people are moving, who (age, income & education) is moving, why they are

moving, projected changes and the impact of those changes. The granular component is particularly important because the

intrastate and interstate conditions, variables and outlook vary dramatically by location. The gold is in the granularity because

residents don’t really live in states or even metro areas, but rather counties, cities, towns and neighborhoods.

____________________

This information has been taken from sources believed to be reliable, but accuracy and completeness cannot be guaranteed. All

rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed without the prior permission of the publisher.

____________________

© 2018 Data Analytics Illinois, Inc.

Phil Chiricotti

President

Data Analytics Illinois, Inc.

PO Box 8

Western Springs, IL 60558

DataAnalyticsIL@outlook.com

____________________