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
Child Abuse Rate State: Michigan
Child Abuse Rate State: Michigan
11.4
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Arenac
Child Abuse Rate County: Arenac
16.4
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(17.2)
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.
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Bay
Child Abuse Rate County: Bay
12.2
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(11.5)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Clare
Child Abuse Rate County: Clare
12.2
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(10.8)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Gladwin
Child Abuse Rate County: Gladwin
19.1
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(19.8)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Gratiot
Child Abuse Rate County: Gratiot
13.9
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(17.3)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Huron
Child Abuse Rate County: Huron
19.2
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(14.3)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Iosco
Child Abuse Rate County: Iosco
18.7
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(16.8)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Isabella
Child Abuse Rate County: Isabella
7.6
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(13.1)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Midland
Child Abuse Rate County: Midland
9.7
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(11.1)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Ogemaw
Child Abuse Rate County: Ogemaw
13.6
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Roscommon
Child Abuse Rate County: Roscommon
18.5
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(21.1)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Saginaw
Child Abuse Rate County: Saginaw
20.5
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(16.9)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Sanilac
Child Abuse Rate County: Sanilac
16.9
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(20.4)
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.
Child Abuse Rate County: Tuscola
Child Abuse Rate County: Tuscola
9.1
Cases per 1,000 children
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(11.4)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(11.2)
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.
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.
Child Care Centers State: Michigan
Child Care Centers State: Michigan
8.9
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8.6)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Arenac
Child Care Centers County: Arenac
8.8
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8.7)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Bay
Child Care Centers County: Bay
10.3
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(10.1)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Clare
Child Care Centers County: Clare
10.5
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8.4)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Gladwin
Child Care Centers County: Gladwin
8.2
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8.0)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Gratiot
Child Care Centers County: Gratiot
7.6
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(7.4)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Huron
Child Care Centers County: Huron
15.1
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(16.5)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Iosco
Child Care Centers County: Iosco
10.3
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(10.0)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Isabella
Child Care Centers County: Isabella
9.6
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(9.2)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Midland
Child Care Centers County: Midland
10.2
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(10.4)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Ogemaw
Child Care Centers County: Ogemaw
7.7
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(7.6)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Roscommon
Child Care Centers County: Roscommon
13.8
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12.9)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Saginaw
Child Care Centers County: Saginaw
9.2
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8.6)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Sanilac
Child Care Centers County: Sanilac
10.1
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8.9)
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.
Child Care Centers County: Tuscola
Child Care Centers County: Tuscola
8.1
Per 1,000 population under age 5
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 82 Michigan counties.
MI Value
(8.9)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(7.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8.6)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate State: Michigan
Child Food Insecurity Rate State: Michigan
17.9%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. States
The distribution is based on data from 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(13.1%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate Region: MiHIA
Child Food Insecurity Rate Region: MiHIA
20.1%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Arenac
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Arenac
19.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(14.5%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Bay
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Bay
18.9%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12.8%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Clare
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Clare
25.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(20.4%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Gladwin
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Gladwin
19.1%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(14.3%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Gratiot
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Gratiot
17.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12.3%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Huron
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Huron
15.8%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(11.0%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Iosco
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Iosco
20.9%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(14.6%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Isabella
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Isabella
17.9%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Midland
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Midland
13.3%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8.4%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Ogemaw
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Ogemaw
23.5%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(17.3%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Roscommon
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Roscommon
26.2%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(22.3%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Saginaw
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Saginaw
24.8%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(18.7%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Sanilac
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Sanilac
19.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(13.8%)
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.
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Tuscola
Child Food Insecurity Rate County: Tuscola
17.3%
(2022)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 83 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(17.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(18.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12.2%)
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.
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.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 State: Michigan
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 State: Michigan
54.3
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
U.S. States
The distribution is based on data from 48 U.S. states. Idaho, Kentucky, and Oklahoma are excluded due to incomparable data between each other and the rest of the country.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Bay
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Bay
39.9
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,038 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Clare
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Clare
71.1
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,859 U.S. counties and county equivalents. Counties in Idaho, Kentucky, and Oklahoma are excluded due to incomparable data between each other and the rest of the country.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Gladwin
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Gladwin
62.3
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,038 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Gratiot
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Gratiot
51.0
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,038 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Huron
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Huron
38.4
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,859 U.S. counties and county equivalents. Counties in Idaho, Kentucky, and Oklahoma are excluded due to incomparable data between each other and the rest of the country.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Iosco
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Iosco
97.8
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,038 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Isabella
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Isabella
43.8
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,038 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Midland
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Midland
29.2
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,859 U.S. counties and county equivalents. Counties in Idaho, Kentucky, and Oklahoma are excluded due to incomparable data between each other and the rest of the country.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Ogemaw
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Ogemaw
83.2
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,038 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Roscommon
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Roscommon
84.5
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,038 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Saginaw
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Saginaw
73.2
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,859 U.S. counties and county equivalents. Counties in Idaho, Kentucky, and Oklahoma are excluded due to incomparable data between each other and the rest of the country.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Sanilac
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Sanilac
47.2
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,038 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Tuscola
Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Tuscola
53.6
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
MI Counties
The distribution is based on data from 60 Michigan counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,859 U.S. counties and county equivalents. Counties in Idaho, Kentucky, and Oklahoma are excluded due to incomparable data between each other and the rest of the country.
MI Value
(54.3)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Children with a Disability State: Michigan
Children with a Disability State: Michigan
5.5%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(5.1%)
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 a Disability County: Bay
Children with a Disability County: Bay
7.9%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(6.6%)
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 a Disability County: Clare
Children with a Disability County: Clare
6.1%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(4.5%)
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 a Disability County: Gladwin
Children with a Disability County: Gladwin
7.8%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(3.4%)
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 a Disability County: Gratiot
Children with a Disability County: Gratiot
5.0%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(2.8%)
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.
Children with a Disability County: Huron
Children with a Disability County: Huron
8.1%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(6.2%)
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.
Children with a Disability County: Iosco
Children with a Disability County: Iosco
9.7%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
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 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 a Disability County: Isabella
Children with a Disability County: Isabella
8.7%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(6.4%)
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 a Disability County: Midland
Children with a Disability County: Midland
5.9%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(2.5%)
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 a Disability County: Ogemaw
Children with a Disability County: Ogemaw
7.9%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(6.8%)
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 a Disability County: Roscommon
Children with a Disability County: Roscommon
7.1%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(2.5%)
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 a Disability County: Saginaw
Children with a Disability County: Saginaw
6.4%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(7.3%)
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 a Disability County: Sanilac
Children with a Disability County: Sanilac
6.3%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(9.3%)
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.
Children with a Disability County: Tuscola
Children with a Disability County: Tuscola
6.4%
(2023)
Compared to:
MI Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
Prior Value
(5.4%)
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.
Children with a Disability Census Place: Akron
Children with a Disability Census Place: Akron
5.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Alma
Children with a Disability Census Place: Alma
11.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Gratiot, MI County Value
(6.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Gratiot County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Applegate
Children with a Disability Census Place: Applegate
3.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Ashley
Children with a Disability Census Place: Ashley
10.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Gratiot, MI County Value
(6.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Gratiot County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Au Gres
Children with a Disability Census Place: Au Gres
5.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Arenac, MI County Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Arenac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Au Sable
Children with a Disability Census Place: Au Sable
7.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Iosco, MI County Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the Iosco County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Auburn
Children with a Disability Census Place: Auburn
2.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Bay, MI County Value
(5.2%)
The regional value is compared to the Bay County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Bad Axe
Children with a Disability Census Place: Bad Axe
3.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Huron, MI County Value
(3.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Huron County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Bay City
Children with a Disability Census Place: Bay City
7.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Bay, MI County Value
(5.2%)
The regional value is compared to the Bay County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Bay Port
Children with a Disability Census Place: Bay Port
1.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Huron, MI County Value
(3.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Huron County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Beal City
Children with a Disability Census Place: Beal City
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Isabella, MI County Value
(6.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Isabella County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Beaverton
Children with a Disability Census Place: Beaverton
16.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Gladwin, MI County Value
(4.3%)
The regional value is compared to the Gladwin County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Birch Run
Children with a Disability Census Place: Birch Run
3.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Breckenridge
Children with a Disability Census Place: Breckenridge
3.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Gratiot, MI County Value
(6.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Gratiot County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Bridgeport
Children with a Disability Census Place: Bridgeport
17.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Brown City
Children with a Disability Census Place: Brown City
3.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Buena Vista
Children with a Disability Census Place: Buena Vista
8.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Burt
Children with a Disability Census Place: Burt
6.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Caro
Children with a Disability Census Place: Caro
9.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Carsonville
Children with a Disability Census Place: Carsonville
6.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Caseville
Children with a Disability Census Place: Caseville
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Huron, MI County Value
(3.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Huron County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Cass City
Children with a Disability Census Place: Cass City
2.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Chesaning
Children with a Disability Census Place: Chesaning
12.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Clare
Children with a Disability Census Place: Clare
8.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Clare, MI County Value
(7.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Clare County value.
Isabella, MI County Value
(6.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Isabella County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Coleman
Children with a Disability Census Place: Coleman
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Midland, MI County Value
(5.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Midland County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Croswell
Children with a Disability Census Place: Croswell
10.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Deckerville
Children with a Disability Census Place: Deckerville
17.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: East Tawas
Children with a Disability Census Place: East Tawas
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Iosco, MI County Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the Iosco County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Elkton
Children with a Disability Census Place: Elkton
2.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Huron, MI County Value
(3.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Huron County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Essexville
Children with a Disability Census Place: Essexville
1.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Bay, MI County Value
(5.2%)
The regional value is compared to the Bay County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Fairgrove
Children with a Disability Census Place: Fairgrove
6.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Farwell
Children with a Disability Census Place: Farwell
7.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Clare, MI County Value
(7.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Clare County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Forestville
Children with a Disability Census Place: Forestville
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Fostoria
Children with a Disability Census Place: Fostoria
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Frankenmuth
Children with a Disability Census Place: Frankenmuth
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Freeland
Children with a Disability Census Place: Freeland
1.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Gagetown
Children with a Disability Census Place: Gagetown
9.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Gladwin
Children with a Disability Census Place: Gladwin
2.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Gladwin, MI County Value
(4.3%)
The regional value is compared to the Gladwin County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Harbor Beach
Children with a Disability Census Place: Harbor Beach
7.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Huron, MI County Value
(3.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Huron County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Harrison
Children with a Disability Census Place: Harrison
10.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Clare, MI County Value
(7.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Clare County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Hemlock
Children with a Disability Census Place: Hemlock
4.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Houghton Lake
Children with a Disability Census Place: Houghton Lake
1.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Roscommon, MI County Value
(4.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Roscommon County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Ithaca
Children with a Disability Census Place: Ithaca
14.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Gratiot, MI County Value
(6.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Gratiot County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Kinde
Children with a Disability Census Place: Kinde
23.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Huron, MI County Value
(3.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Huron County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Kingston
Children with a Disability Census Place: Kingston
18.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Lake Isabella
Children with a Disability Census Place: Lake Isabella
6.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Isabella, MI County Value
(6.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Isabella County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Lexington
Children with a Disability Census Place: Lexington
12.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Loomis
Children with a Disability Census Place: Loomis
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Isabella, MI County Value
(6.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Isabella County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Lupton
Children with a Disability Census Place: Lupton
14.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Ogemaw, MI County Value
(8.6%)
The regional value is compared to the Ogemaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Marlette
Children with a Disability Census Place: Marlette
7.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Mayville
Children with a Disability Census Place: Mayville
7.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Melvin
Children with a Disability Census Place: Melvin
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Merrill
Children with a Disability Census Place: Merrill
7.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Midland
Children with a Disability Census Place: Midland
5.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Midland, MI County Value
(5.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Midland County value.
Bay, MI County Value
(5.2%)
The regional value is compared to the Bay County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Millington
Children with a Disability Census Place: Millington
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Minden City
Children with a Disability Census Place: Minden City
26.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Mount Pleasant
Children with a Disability Census Place: Mount Pleasant
8.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Isabella, MI County Value
(6.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Isabella County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Oakley
Children with a Disability Census Place: Oakley
9.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Omer
Children with a Disability Census Place: Omer
12.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Arenac, MI County Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Arenac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Oscoda
Children with a Disability Census Place: Oscoda
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Iosco, MI County Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the Iosco County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Owendale
Children with a Disability Census Place: Owendale
5.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Huron, MI County Value
(3.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Huron County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Peck
Children with a Disability Census Place: Peck
6.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Perrinton
Children with a Disability Census Place: Perrinton
9.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Gratiot, MI County Value
(6.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Gratiot County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Pigeon
Children with a Disability Census Place: Pigeon
9.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Huron, MI County Value
(3.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Huron County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Pinconning
Children with a Disability Census Place: Pinconning
5.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Bay, MI County Value
(5.2%)
The regional value is compared to the Bay County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Port Austin
Children with a Disability Census Place: Port Austin
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Huron, MI County Value
(3.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Huron County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Port Hope
Children with a Disability Census Place: Port Hope
0.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Huron, MI County Value
(3.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Huron County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Port Sanilac
Children with a Disability Census Place: Port Sanilac
7.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Sanilac, MI County Value
(6.4%)
The regional value is compared to the Sanilac County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Prescott
Children with a Disability Census Place: Prescott
16.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Ogemaw, MI County Value
(8.6%)
The regional value is compared to the Ogemaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Prudenville
Children with a Disability Census Place: Prudenville
5.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Roscommon, MI County Value
(4.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Roscommon County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Reese
Children with a Disability Census Place: Reese
4.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Tuscola, MI County Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Tuscola County value.
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Robin Glen-Indiantown
Children with a Disability Census Place: Robin Glen-Indiantown
15.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Roscommon
Children with a Disability Census Place: Roscommon
2.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Roscommon, MI County Value
(4.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Roscommon County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Rose City
Children with a Disability Census Place: Rose City
11.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Ogemaw, MI County Value
(8.6%)
The regional value is compared to the Ogemaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Rosebush
Children with a Disability Census Place: Rosebush
10.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Isabella, MI County Value
(6.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Isabella County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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 Place: Saginaw
Children with a Disability Census Place: Saginaw
13.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Saginaw, MI County Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Saginaw County value.
MI Value
(4.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Michigan State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national 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.
