Advanced Search: Build a Custom Dashboard
In the fields below, search for indicators by location, topics, population, classification, subgroup, or comparison. No fields are required, but we suggest selecting a location or two to start. In the additional search options section, select options to group and order search results. To learn more about how to customize a dashboard, see our help center.
Visit the Indicator List Page to see the full list of indicators and locations available on the site.
Search Results:
Indicator Gauge Icon Legend
Legend Colors
Red is bad, green is good, blue is not statistically different/neutral.
Compared to Distribution
the value is in the best half of communities.
the value is in the 2nd worst quarter of communities.
the value is in the worst quarter of communities.
Compared to Target
meets target; 
does not meet target.
Compared to a Single Value
lower than the comparison value;
higher than the comparison value;
not statistically different from comparison value.
Trend
non-significant change over time; 
significant change over time; 
no change over time.
Compared to Prior Value
higher than the previous measurement period;
lower than the previous measurement period;
no statistically different change from previous measurement period.
Health / Children's Health
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145002000
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145002000
19.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145002100
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145002100
16.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010100
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010100
5.7%
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(6.6%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010101
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010101
7.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010102
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010102
0.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010200
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010200
4.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010302
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010302
5.3%
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(6.6%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010303
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010303
2.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010304
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010304
6.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010305
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010305
4.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010306
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010306
3.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010401
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010401
14.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010402
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010402
17.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010403
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010403
2.5%
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(6.6%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010404
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010404
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010405
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010405
14.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010501
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010501
1.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010502
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010502
6.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010600
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010600
4.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010700
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010700
3.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010800
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145010800
15.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011000
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011000
11.1%
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(6.6%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011001
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011001
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011002
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011002
6.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011100
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011100
8.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011200
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011200
6.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011300
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011300
1.9%
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(6.6%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011301
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011301
2.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011302
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011302
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011500
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011500
22.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011600
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011600
16.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011701
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011701
2.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011702
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011702
1.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011800
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011800
13.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011901
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011901
2.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011902
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145011902
6.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012001
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012001
4.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012002
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012002
3.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012003
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012003
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012100
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012100
6.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012200
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012200
6.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012300
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012300
1.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012400
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012400
6.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012500
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012500
1.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012600
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012600
14.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012700
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012700
8.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012900
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145012900
5.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145013000
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145013000
3.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145013100
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26145013100
2.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970100
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970100
6.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970200
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970200
7.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970300
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970300
3.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970400
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970400
10.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970500
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970500
5.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970600
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970600
6.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970700
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970700
5.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970800
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970800
8.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970900
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151970900
7.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151971000
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151971000
10.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151971100
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151971100
3.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151971200
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26151971200
2.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000100
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000100
2.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000200
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000200
1.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000300
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000300
7.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000400
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000400
3.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000500
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000500
6.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000600
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000600
8.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000700
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000700
5.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000800
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000800
2.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000900
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157000900
3.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157001000
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157001000
2.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157001100
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157001100
14.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157001200
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157001200
4.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157001300
Children with a Disability Census Tract: 26157001300
9.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance State: Michigan
Children with Health Insurance State: Michigan
97.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. States
The distribution is based on data from 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
Prior Value
(97.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance Region: MiHIA
Children with Health Insurance Region: MiHIA
96.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(96.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Arenac
Children with Health Insurance County: Arenac
95.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(95.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Bay
Children with Health Insurance County: Bay
96.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(97.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Clare
Children with Health Insurance County: Clare
95.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(95.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Gladwin
Children with Health Insurance County: Gladwin
95.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(95.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Gratiot
Children with Health Insurance County: Gratiot
97.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(97.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Huron
Children with Health Insurance County: Huron
96.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(95.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Iosco
Children with Health Insurance County: Iosco
96.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(96.7%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Isabella
Children with Health Insurance County: Isabella
95.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(95.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Midland
Children with Health Insurance County: Midland
97.4%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(97.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Ogemaw
Children with Health Insurance County: Ogemaw
95.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(96.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Roscommon
Children with Health Insurance County: Roscommon
96.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(97.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Saginaw
Children with Health Insurance County: Saginaw
97.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(97.7%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Sanilac
Children with Health Insurance County: Sanilac
95.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(95.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with Health Insurance County: Tuscola
Children with Health Insurance County: Tuscola
97.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(97.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(97.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Health / Children's Health
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance
Value
Compared to:
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance State: Michigan
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance State: Michigan
22%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. States
The distribution is based on data from 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(17%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Arenac
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Arenac
22%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(21%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Bay
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Bay
20%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(17%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Clare
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Clare
14%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Gladwin
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Gladwin
0%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Gratiot
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Gratiot
15%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Huron
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Huron
0%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Iosco
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Iosco
0%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Isabella
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Isabella
11%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Midland
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Midland
20%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(19%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Ogemaw
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Ogemaw
8%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Roscommon
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Roscommon
12%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(10%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Saginaw
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Saginaw
26%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(26%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Sanilac
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Sanilac
5%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Tuscola
Food Insecure Children Likely Ineligible for Assistance County: Tuscola
8%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,134 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(22%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(25%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(13%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children State: Michigan
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children State: Michigan
66.1%
(2022)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(69.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children Region: MiHIA
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children Region: MiHIA
69.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(71.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Arenac
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Arenac
71.9%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(76.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Bay
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Bay
76.6%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(80.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Clare
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Clare
57.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(61.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Gladwin
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Gladwin
60.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(51.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Gratiot
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Gratiot
71.8%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(73.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Huron
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Huron
72.9%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(74.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Iosco
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Iosco
68.9%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(69.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Isabella
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Isabella
64.1%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(70.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Midland
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Midland
76.3%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(78.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Ogemaw
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Ogemaw
63.6%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(67.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Roscommon
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Roscommon
62.8%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(68.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Saginaw
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Saginaw
71.5%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(70.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Sanilac
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Sanilac
58.8%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(61.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Tuscola
Immunization Status of 19 to 35-Month-Old Children County: Tuscola
65.5%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(66.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(67.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate State: Michigan
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate State: Michigan
16.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. States
The distribution is based on data from 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Arenac
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Arenac
19.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(32.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Bay
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Bay
17.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(26.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Clare
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Clare
24.4%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(35.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Gladwin
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Gladwin
19.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(30.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Gratiot
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Gratiot
14.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(23.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Huron
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Huron
14.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(25.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Iosco
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Iosco
20.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(31.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Isabella
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Isabella
14.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(24.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Midland
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Midland
11.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(20.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Ogemaw
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Ogemaw
19.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(31.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Roscommon
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Roscommon
23.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(36.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Saginaw
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Saginaw
19.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(25.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Sanilac
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Sanilac
16.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(26.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Tuscola
Projected Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Tuscola
16.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(26.7%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate State: Michigan
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate State: Michigan
11.7
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(12.1)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Arenac
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Arenac
17.2
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(13.3)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Bay
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Bay
11.5
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(11.3)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Clare
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Clare
10.8
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(18.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Gladwin
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Gladwin
19.8
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(23.6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Gratiot
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Gratiot
17.3
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(18.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Huron
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Huron
14.3
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(22.6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Iosco
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Iosco
16.8
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(18.3)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Isabella
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Isabella
13.1
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(11.3)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Midland
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Midland
11.1
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(11.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Ogemaw
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Ogemaw
13.3
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(16.4)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Roscommon
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Roscommon
21.1
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(21.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Saginaw
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Saginaw
16.9
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(16.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Sanilac
Substantiated Child Abuse Rate County: Sanilac
20.4
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.7)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(25.3)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
