Category Archives: Statistics

2019 Segal Health Plan Cost Trend Survey

Source: Segal Consulting, Public Sector Data Fall 2018

From the summary:
Increases in Medical and Prescription Drug Costs Projected to Be Lower for 2019

Medical and prescription drug cost trends, for both actives and non-Medicare retirees, are projected to be lower in 2019 than in previous years.

That’s the headline finding from Segal’s 2019 Health Plan Cost Trend Survey, which surveyed more than 100 managed care organizations (MCOs), health insurers, pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) and third-party administrators (TPAs).

Other Key Findings
– Medical plan cost trends are projected to be lower than 2018 projections.
– Actual medical and prescription drug trend results for 2017 were significantly lower than carrier projections for 2017.
– Actual prescription drug plan cost trends for 2017 were the second lowest in the last 13 years.
– Price inflation continues to be the primary driver of overall medical and prescription drug cost trends.
– Network physician reimbursement rate increases are projected to increase by less than 2 percent for both primary care and specialists, below overall CPI rates.
– Prescription drug cost-management strategies and improved vendor contracting are still plan sponsors’ top priorities.

Related:
Multiemployer

Five-Year Trends Available for Median Household Income, Poverty Rates and Computer and Internet Use

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Press Release, Release Number CB18-187, December 6, 2018

Today, the U.S. Census Bureau announced the release of the 2013-2017 American Community Survey (ACS) five-year estimates, which features more than 40 social, economic, housing and demographic topics, including homeownership rates and costs, health insurance, and educational attainment. The ACS five-year data release produces statistics for all of the nation’s 3,142 counties. It is the only full data set available for the 2,316 counties with populations too small to produce a complete set of single-year ACS estimates. ….

Some highlights from the report include that, when comparing the 2013-2017 period to the 2008-2012 period, median household income increased in 16.6 percent of all counties (521 counties) between the 2008-2012 period and the 2013-2017 period while poverty declined in 14 percent of all counties 441 counties). Alternatively, when comparing the same time periods, median household income declined in 222 counties (7.1 percent) and poverty rates increased in 264 counties (8.4 percent)…..

DELTA 8.7 – New data dashboards launched to inform policymaking on modern slavery and child labor

Source: United Nations University – Centre for Policy Research (UNU-CPR), 2018

What does delta mean?
The Greek letter delta—Δ—is used in mathematics and science to signify the amount of change in a particular variable.

What is 8.7?
In Target 8.7 of the Sustainable Development Goals, States committed to take immediate and effective measures to eradicate modern slavery, human trafficking, forced labour and child labour.

What do they mean together?
Delta + 8.7 = Measuring the change towards Target 8.7.

On any given day in 2016, the latest year for which we have a reliable estimate, 40.3 million people were in situations of modern slavery or forced labour—or one in every 174 people alive —and 152 million children were victims of child labour. Urgent action is needed to address these problems. With Target 8.7 of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 193 countries pledged their commitment to take effective measures to eradicate modern slavery, human trafficking, forced labour and child labour.

But what are effective measures? What works to address these problems?

To answer these questions, the United Nations University – Centre for Policy Research (UNU-CPR) created Delta 8.7—an innovative project that helps policy actors understand and use data responsibly to inform policies that contribute to achieving Target 8.7. Delta 8.7 brings together the most useful data, evidence, research and news, analyses cutting-edge data, and helps people understand that data so it can be translated it into effective policy.

Resources
Dive deeper into Thematic Overviews, online and offline Learning Opportunities, original Research by the Delta 8.7 team, or explore the site Glossary.

Data and Measurement
Visit the Data Dashboards to explore evidence at the national, regional and global levels, or learn How to Measure the Change through our introductory materials on data science and measurement.

Forum
The Forum is the world’s leading venue for discussion of the latest data and evidence about forced labour, modern slavery, human trafficking and child labour, and what it means for policy to achieve Target 8.7.

Call to Action
Explore the efforts of countries that have endorsed the UK’s Call to Action to End Forced Labour, Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking.

Who Pays: A Distributional Analysis of the Tax Systems in All 50 States

Source: Meg Wiehe, Aidan Davis, Carl Davis, Matt Gardner, Lisa Christensen Gee, Dylan Grundman, Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), October 2018

From the summary:
Who Pays: A Distributional Analysis of the Tax Systems in All 50 States (the sixth edition of the report) is the only distributional analysis of tax systems in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. This comprehensive report assesses tax fairness by measuring effective state and local tax rates paid by all income groups. No two state tax systems are the same; this report provides detailed analyses of the features of every state tax code. It includes state-by-state profiles that provide baseline data to help lawmakers and the public understand how current tax policies affect taxpayers at all income levels.
The report includes these main findings:

– The vast majority of state and local tax systems are inequitable and upside-down, taking a much greater share of income from low- and middle-income families than from wealthy families. The absence of a graduated personal income tax in many states and an overreliance on consumption taxes contribute to this longstanding problem.

– The lower one’s income, the higher one’s overall effective state and local tax rate. On average, the lowest-income 20 percent of taxpayers face a state and local tax rate more than 50 percent higher than the top 1 percent of households. The nationwide average effective state and local tax rate is 11.4 percent for the lowest-income 20 percent of individuals and families, 9.9 percent for the middle 20 percent, and 7.4 percent for the top 1 percent.

– Tax structures in 45 states exacerbate income inequality. Most state and local tax systems worsen income inequality by making incomes more unequal after collecting state and local taxes. Five states and the District of Columbia somewhat narrow the gap between lower- and middle- income taxpayers and upper-income taxpayers, making income slightly more equitable after collecting state and local taxes.

– In the 10 states with the most regressive tax structures (The Terrible 10), the lowest-income 20 percent pay up to six times as much of their income in taxes as their wealthy counterparts. Washington State is the most regressive, followed by Texas, Florida, South Dakota, Nevada, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Oklahoma, and Wyoming.

– Heavy reliance on sales and excise taxes are characteristics of the most regressive state tax systems. Six of the 10 most regressive states derive roughly half to two-thirds of their tax revenue from sales and excise taxes, compared to a national average of about one-third. Seven of these states do not levy a broad-based personal income tax while the remaining three have a personal income tax rate structure that is flat or virtually flat. A calculation of effective sales and excise tax rates finds that, on average, the lowest-income 20 percent pay 7.1 percent, the middle 20 percent pay 4.8 percent and the top 1 percent pay a comparatively meager 0.9 percent rate.

– A progressive graduated income tax is a characteristic of the least regressive state tax systems. States with the most equitable state and local tax systems derive, on average, more than one-third of their tax revenue from income taxes, which is above the national average of 27 percent. These states promote progressivity through the structure of their income taxes, including their rates (higher marginal rates for higher-income taxpayers), deductions, exemptions, and use of targeted refundable credits.

States commended as “low-tax” are often high-tax for low- and middle-income families. The 10 states with the highest taxes on the poor are Arizona, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Washington. Six of these are also among the “terrible ten” because they are not only high-tax for the poorest, they are also low-tax for their richest residents.

Related:
Data Available for Download
State-by-State Data and ITEP Tax Inequality Index Map

Declines in Child Poverty Continue in 2017; Overall Rate Still Above Pre-Recession Level

Source: Jessica Carson, Andrew Schaefer, Beth Mattingly, Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire, Data Snapshot, September 13, 2018

From the summary:
The official poverty measure indicates that child poverty declined by 1.1 percentage points between 2016 and 2017, according to analyses of the latest American Community Survey data released today. By 2017, child poverty across the nation was still 0.4 percentage point higher than before the Great Recession. Child poverty remained higher in cities and rural places than in the suburbs. For the first time, rates in cities dipped below the pre-recession level, although poverty is still slightly higher in rural and suburban places than in 2007.

Key Findings:
For the first time, rates in cities dipped below the pre-recession level, although poverty is still slightly higher in rural and suburban places than in 2007.

Income data from the Census may not tell full story on middle-class trends

Source: Gary Burtless and Christopher Pulliam, Brookings Institution, Up Front, September 17, 2018

…. The resulting news stories deserve our attention, but it is important to keep a vital question in mind: Does the CPS give us an accurate picture of household incomes?

In many recent years, the answer has been “No.” Compared to the national income and product accounts (NIPA) produced by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), the CPS often gives us a strikingly different picture of the recent trend in household income. ….

Here’s How Much Time You’ll Waste Commuting in Your Lifetime (by City)

Source: Alex Lauderdale, EducatedDriver.org, August 29, 2018

Commuting is the most stressful part of the day for many people. It’s like a recurring nightmare — day after day, week after week, year after year spent sitting in bumper-to-bumper traffic, stuck behind the wheel instead of spending time with family and friends doing the things you love. It takes a serious toll on the mind and body and on relationships. Not to mention, it can be seriously damaging to your health, leading to headaches, backaches, sleep problems, fatigue, mental health problems, and more.

The worst part? Commute times are only getting worse all across the country. In the US, the average worker spends 52.2 minutes a day commuting to and from work, but in many parts of the country, things are even worse. Over the course of just a week, that’s 4.35 hours a week spent commuting.

That got us thinking — how many days does the average person spend commuting to and from work over the course of their life?

We did the math for nearly 1,000 US cities. The average American loses 408 days of their life commuting, and in many areas, the toll is even higher.

Using the interactive map below, you can see how many days of your life you can expect to spend to commuting in the city where you live. Caution: the answer might depress you.

Women and Men in the Low-Wage Workforce, State by State

Source: National Women’s Law Center, July 20, 2018

Nationwide, women are nearly two-thirds of the nearly 24 million workers in low-wage jobs that typically pay $11.50 per hour or less—and women outnumber men in the low-wage workforce in every state and the District of Columbia. In all but one state (Nevada), women make up at least 60 percent of the low-wage workforce, and women are more than two-thirds of the low-wage workforce in 29 states. View our interactive map to compare women’s and men’s representation in the low-wage workforce in your state.