Transfer Student Home County Mapping Prepared for Clarion University of Pennsylvania October 2013 In the following report, Hanover Research presents maps that compare the wealth of the counties in Pennsylvania with the average number of transfer students enrolled at Clarion University of Pennsylvania from those counties. Hanover Research | October 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary and Key Findings ............................................................................... 3 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................3 Key Findings ...........................................................................................................................3 Section I: Methodology .................................................................................................... 6 Section II: Maps ............................................................................................................... 7 Appendix A: Counties without Transfer Students ............................................................ 11 Appendix B: County Codes ............................................................................................. 13 Appendix C: Transfer Students By County and Year......................................................... 14 © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 2 Hanover Research | October 2013 EXECUTIVE S UMMARY AND KEY FINDINGS INTRODUCTION In the following report, Hanover Research presents maps that compare wealth of counties in Pennsylvania (PA) with the number of transfer students enrolled at Clarion University of Pennsylvania in Fall 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 from these counties. For this analysis, we use county-level per capita income as an indicator for the amount of wealth of these counties. In total, we created four different maps, with the first map (Figure 2.1) providing an overview of the distribution of per capita income among the counties in PA. The second and third maps (Figures 2.2 and 2.3) compare the wealth of the counties with the number of transfer enrollments1 at the university from the counties in PA. The final map (Figure 2.4) shows how the number of transfer students at Clarion University from the various counties in PA changed between Fall 2010 and Fall 2013 in comparison to the wealth of the counties. KEY FINDINGS  Table 1 shows the counties with the highest and lowest per capita income in PA with the average number of transfer freshmen and average overall transfer enrollment between 2010 and 2013. Between the top three wealthiest counties in terms of per capita income, Clarion University enrolls slightly more transfer students from Montgomery County (four) than either Chester County (one) or Bucks County (three). Table 1: Wealthiest and Poorest PA Counties 1 $42,042 AVERAGE NUMBER OF TRANSFER FRESHMEN (2010-13) 0 AVERAGE TRANSFER ENROLLMENT ( 2010-13) 1 Montgomery County $41,163 1 4 Bucks County $36,601 BOTTOM THREE PER CAPITA INCOME Forest County $14,306 2 AVERAGE NUMBER OF TRANSFER FRESHMEN ( 2010-13) 1 3 AVERAGE TRANSFER ENROLLMENT ( 2010-13) 1 Fayette County $19,717 0 0 Mifflin County $19,758 0 0 PA $27,824 117 281 TOP THREE PER CAPITA INCOME Chester County Average number of transfer freshmen and total transfer enrollment at the University are mapped separately. For each of the years, total transfer enrollment takes into account students admitted to Clarion University in that fall semester at any grade level. Transfer enrollments are not applicable for graduate programs. © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 3 Hanover Research | October 2013  Table 2 indicates that on average, approximately 45 percent of new transfer students from PA who enrolled in an undergraduate program at Clarion University between 2010 and 2013 are from Allegheny County, Venango County, and Clarion County. Only Allegheny is considered a wealthy county, as its average per capita income is higher than the state average. There are several counties from which Clarion University did not enroll any new transfer students between 2010 and 20132. Table 2: Average Number of Transfer Freshmen (2010 to 2013) Allegheny County AVERAGE NUMBER OF TRANSFER FRESHMEN (2010-13) 117 AVERAGE NUMBER OF TRANSFER FRESHMEN (2010-13) 21 (17.7%) Venango County 18 (15.6%) Below State Average Clarion County 13 (11.3%) Below State Average PA TOP  PER CAPITA INCOME $27,824 COUNTY PER CAPITA INCOME Above State Average In terms of both undergraduate and graduate transfer enrollments at Clarion University, approximately 37 percent of the all in-state transfer students come from Allegheny County, Venango County, and Clarion County. Between 2010 and 2013, an average of 44 transfer students enrolled from Allegheny County, which is considered a wealthy county. There are several counties from which Clarion University did not enroll any transfer students between 2010 and 20133. Table 3: Average Transfer Enrollment (2010 to 2013) Allegheny County AVERAGE TRANSFER ENROLLMENT (2010-13) 281 AVERAGE TRANSFER ENROLLMENT (2010-13) 44 (15.6%) Venango County 33 (11.8%) Below State Average Clarion County 28 (10.0%) Below State Average PA TOP PER CAPITA INCOME $27,824 COUNTY PER CAPITA INCOME Above State Average 2 Please refer to Figure A.1 in Appendix A for the full list of counties from which Clarion University did not enroll any new transfer students between 2010 and 2013. 3 Please refer to Figure A.2 in Appendix A for the full list of counties from which Clarion University did not enroll any transfer students between 2010 and 2013. © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 4 Hanover Research | October 2013  Between 2010 and 2013, Clarion University experienced the highest increases in transfer enrollment figures from Allegheny County, Clarion County, and Venango County. However, over the same time period, the number of transfer students enrolled at Clarion University from Clearfield County, Elk County, Dauphin County, and Center County decreased. Table 4: Difference in Enrollment Between 2010 and 2013 CHANGE FROM 2010 TO 2013 PER CAPITA INCOME PA -26 $27,824 INCREASE IN ENROLLMENT CHANGE FROM 2010 TO 2013 COUNTY PER CAPITA INCOME Allegheny County 13 Above State Average Clarion County 10 Below State Average Venango County 4 Below State Average DECREASE IN ENROLLMENT CHANGE FROM 2010 TO 2013 COUNTY PER CAPITA INCOME Clearfield County -11 Below State Average Elk County -7 Below State Average Dauphin County -5 Above State Average Centre County -5 Below State Average © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 5 Hanover Research | October 2013 SECTION I: METHODOLOGY Clarion University of Pennsylvania provided Hanover Research with student level data for Fall 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013, which were used to compute the number of new transfer students as well as the total number of transfer students enrolled at Clarion University from each county in PA. In this report, we compare the four year average number of transfer freshman and the four year average transfer enrollment with the wealth of each of the counties in the state. In addition to this, we also created a separate map which indicates how the number of transfer students enrolled at the university from PA counties varied between 2010 and 2013. We used per capita income of each county as a standard indicator of the “wealth” of a county. County level per capita income is available from the U.S. Census Bureau, and is defined as the mean money income received in the past 12 months computed for everyone over the age of 15 in the geographic area.4 The per capita income data used in this report use a five year estimate (2007-2011) in 2011 inflation adjusted dollars. Figure 2.1 is a simple choropleth map that shows the distribution of per capita income among the various counties in PA (darker shade of blue indicating wealthier counties). In Figures 2.2 through 2.4, counties with per capita income higher than the state average are highlighted in green, while counties with per capita income lower than the state average are highlighted in orange. For each of the counties, different shades of green and orange are used to indicate the average number of new transfer students, the average number of transfer students enrolled at Clarion University, and the difference in the number of transfer students enrolled between 2010 and 2013. In our maps, darker shades of green or orange indicate higher transfer enrollment or higher differences in transfer enrollment between years. 4 These data are collected in the American Community Survey (ACS). The data are estimates and are subject to sampling variability. The data for each geographic area are presented together with margins of error at factfinder2.census.gov. The data are period estimates, that is, they represent the characteristics of the population over a specific 60-month data collection period. © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 6 Hanover Research | October 2013 SECTION II: MAPS Figure 2.1: Pennsylvania per Capita Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2011 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars), 2007-2011 by County5 5 Please refer to Figure B.1 in Appendix B for the county codes. © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 7 Hanover Research | October 2013 Figure 2.2: Per Capita Income and Average Number of Transfer Freshmen at Clarion University of Pennsylvania between 2010 and 2013 by Counties in Pennsylvania *Please refer to Figure C.1 in Appendix C for detailed transfer freshmen numbers by county and year. © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 8 Hanover Research | October 2013 Figure 2.3: Per Capita Income and Average Number of All Transfer Students Enrolled at Clarion University of Pennsylvania between 2010 and 2013 by Counties in Pennsylvania *Please refer to Figure C.2 in Appendix C for detailed transfer enrollment numbers by county and year. © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 9 Hanover Research | October 2013 Figure 2.4: Per Capita Income and the Difference in Transfer Student Enrollment at Clarion University of Pennsylvania between 2010 and 2013 by Counties in Pennsylvania © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 10 Hanover Research | October 2013 APPENDIX A: COUNTIES WITHOUT TRANSFER STUDENTS Figure A.1: Counties from Which There Were No Freshmen Transfer Students at Clarion between 2010 and 2013 COUNTY Adams County Bedford County Berks County Blair County Bradford County Carbon County Fulton County Greene County Huntingdon County Juniata County Luzerne County Mifflin County Monroe County Montour County Perry County Snyder County Sullivan County Susquehanna County Union County Wayne County Wyoming County © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice COUNTY PER CAPITA INCOME Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average 11 Hanover Research | October 2013 Figure A.2: Counties from Which There Were No Transfer Students Enrolled at Clarion between 2010 and 2013. COUNTY Greene County Huntingdon County Juniata County Montour County Snyder County Sullivan County Susquehanna County Wayne County © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice COUNTY PER CAPITA INCOME Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average Below State Average 12 Hanover Research | October 2013 APPENDIX B: COUNTY CODES Figure B.1: County Codes Used in the Maps COUNTY NAMES CODE COUNTY NAMES CODE Adams County AD Juniata County JU Allegheny County AL Lackawanna County LA Armstrong County AR Lancaster County LN Beaver County BE Lawrence County LW Bedford County BD Lebanon County LE Berks County BR Lehigh County LH Blair County BL Luzerne County LZ Bradford County BF Lycoming County LY Bucks County BU McKean County MK Butler County BT Mercer County ME Cambria County CA Mifflin County MI Cameron County CM Monroe County MO Carbon County CR Montgomery County MT Centre County CE Montour County MU Chester County CH Northampton County NO Clarion County CI Northumberland County NT Clearfield County CL Perry County PE Clinton County CN Philadelphia County PH Columbia County CO Pike County PI Crawford County CW Potter County PO Cumberland County CU Schuylkill County SC Dauphin County DA Snyder County SN Delaware County DL Somerset County SO Elk County EL Sullivan County SU Erie County ER Susquehanna County SQ Fayette County FA Tioga County TI Forest County FO Union County UN Franklin County FR Venango County VE Fulton County FU Warren County WA Greene County GR Washington County WS Huntingdon County HU Wayne County WY Indiana County IN Westmoreland County WE Jefferson County JE Wyoming County WO York County YO © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 13 Hanover Research | October 2013 APPENDIX C: TRANSFER STUDENTS BY COUNTY AND Y EAR Figure C.1: Transfer Freshmen by County and Year COUNTY 2010 2011 2012 2013 Adams County Allegheny County Armstrong County Beaver County Bedford County Berks County Blair County Bradford County Bucks County Butler County Cambria County Cameron County Carbon County Centre County Chester County Clarion County Clearfield County Clinton County Columbia County Crawford County Cumberland County Dauphin County Delaware County Elk County Erie County Fayette County Forest County Franklin County Fulton County Greene County Huntingdon County Indiana County Jefferson County Juniata County Lackawanna County Lancaster County 0 17 3 3 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 1 0 2 0 8 6 0 1 2 0 4 0 4 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 6 0 0 1 0 17 3 6 0 0 0 0 1 5 1 0 0 0 1 17 7 0 0 1 1 0 1 4 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 2 0 14 2 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 2 0 0 1 0 13 4 0 0 3 1 1 1 4 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 8 0 2 1 0 35 2 6 0 0 0 0 1 6 0 2 0 0 0 15 1 1 0 4 0 1 1 3 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 1 © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice FOUR YEAR AVERAGE 0 21 3 4 0 0 0 0 2 5 1 1 0 1 0 13 5 0 0 3 1 2 1 4 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 1 1 14 Hanover Research | October 2013 COUNTY 2010 2011 2012 2013 Lawrence County Lebanon County Lehigh County Luzerne County Lycoming County McKean County Mercer County Mifflin County Monroe County Montgomery Montour County Northampton County Northumberland County Perry County Philadelphia County Pike County Potter County Schuylkill County Snyder County Somerset County Sullivan County Susquehanna County Tioga County Union County Venango County Warren County Washington County Wayne County Westmoreland County Wyoming County York County Total 2 1 0 0 1 1 5 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 22 2 3 0 6 0 4 123 3 1 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 15 1 1 0 2 0 0 113 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 1 4 0 3 0 0 106 1 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 1 0 5 0 1 127 © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice FOUR YEAR AVERAGE 2 1 0 0 1 1 4 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 1 2 0 4 0 1 117 15 Hanover Research | October 2013 Figure C.2: All Transfer Enrollments by County and Year DIFFERENCE COUNTY 2010 2011 2012 2013 FOUR YEAR AVERAGE BETWEEN 2010 Adams County 1 1 1 0 1 -1 Allegheny County 43 33 43 56 44 13 Armstrong County 9 16 12 6 11 -3 Beaver County 8 9 11 8 9 0 Bedford County 0 1 0 0 0 0 Berks County 0 0 0 1 0 1 AND 2013 Blair County 2 1 1 0 1 -2 Bradford County 1 0 0 0 0 -1 Bucks County 2 4 4 3 3 1 Butler County 17 16 19 20 18 3 Cambria County 1 3 2 2 2 1 Cameron County 2 0 2 2 2 0 Carbon County 1 2 2 0 1 -1 Centre County 5 0 1 0 2 -5 Chester County 0 1 2 1 1 1 Clarion County 18 32 34 28 28 10 Clearfield County 19 21 14 8 16 -11 Clinton County 0 0 0 1 0 1 Columbia County 1 0 2 0 1 -1 Crawford County 5 3 10 7 6 2 Cumberland County 3 3 7 1 4 -2 Dauphin County 6 6 3 1 4 -5 Delaware County 0 4 1 2 2 2 Elk County 10 10 8 3 8 -7 Erie County 5 10 8 4 7 -1 Fayette County 0 0 0 1 0 1 Forest County 1 1 2 0 1 -1 Franklin County 1 0 0 1 1 0 Fulton County 0 0 1 0 0 0 Greene County 0 0 0 0 0 0 Huntingdon County 0 0 0 0 0 0 Indiana County 2 3 3 0 2 -2 Jefferson County 12 18 17 13 15 1 Juniata County 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lackawanna County 0 0 2 0 1 0 Lancaster County 3 6 5 2 4 -1 Lawrence County 4 4 1 4 3 0 © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 16 Hanover Research | October 2013 COUNTY 2010 2011 2012 2013 DIFFERENCE FOUR YEAR AVERAGE BETWEEN 2010 AND 2013 Lebanon County 1 1 0 0 1 -1 Lehigh County 0 2 3 2 2 2 Luzerne County 0 2 1 1 1 1 Lycoming County 2 3 1 0 2 -2 McKean County 1 3 5 2 3 1 Mercer County 11 8 8 7 9 -4 Mifflin County 1 0 0 0 0 -1 Monroe County 0 0 1 0 0 0 Montgomery 4 6 3 3 4 -1 Montour County 0 0 0 0 0 0 Northampton County 4 1 2 1 2 -3 Northumberland County 2 0 0 0 1 -2 Perry County 0 1 0 0 0 0 Philadelphia County 7 2 3 5 4 -2 Pike County 1 1 1 0 1 -1 Potter County 1 1 2 0 1 -1 Schuylkill County 1 0 3 2 2 1 Snyder County 0 0 0 0 0 0 Somerset County 0 1 0 0 0 0 Sullivan County 0 0 0 0 0 0 Susquehanna County 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tioga County 1 0 0 0 0 -1 Union County 0 0 1 0 0 0 Venango County 28 33 40 32 33 4 Warren County 5 3 4 2 4 -3 Washington County 3 5 6 2 4 -1 Wayne County 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westmoreland County 11 13 8 9 10 -2 Wyoming County 1 0 0 0 0 -1 York County 5 1 2 3 3 -2 Total 272 295 312 246 281 -26 © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 17 Hanover Research | October 2013 PROJECT EVALUATION FORM Hanover Research is committed to providing a work product that meets or exceeds partner expectations. In keeping with that goal, we would like to hear your opinions regarding our reports. Feedback is critically important and serves as the strongest mechanism by which we tailor our research to your organization. When you have had a chance to evaluate this report, please take a moment to fill out the following questionnaire. http://www.hanoverresearch.com/evaluation/index.php CAVEAT The publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this brief. The publisher and authors make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this brief and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose. There are no warranties which extend beyond the descriptions contained in this paragraph. No warranty may be created or extended by representatives of Hanover Research or its marketing materials. The accuracy and completeness of the information provided herein and the opinions stated herein are not guaranteed or warranted to produce any particular results, and the advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for every partner. Neither the publisher nor the authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. Moreover, Hanover Research is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional services. Partners requiring such services are advised to consult an appropriate professional. © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 18 Hanover Research | October 2013 1750 H Street NW, 2nd Floor Washington, DC 20006 P 202.756.2971 F 866.808.6585 www.hanoverresearch.com © 2013 Hanover Research | Academy Administration Practice 19