ACS Demographics Report for Bayfield town, CO
Questions, contact clare@dynamicplanning.co
15 June 2023
Introduction
Natural disasters are social phenomena as well as meteorological and physical events. This demographic profile provides an overview of relevant U.S. Census data, and seeks to identify vulnerable populations (also described as “at-risk individuals” ) in particular. The community profile will be integrated into the HMP as Section 4.3. Town of Bayfield’s demographic profile determines how impacts of hazard events will be distributed throughout the community, especially for groups with underlying vulnerabilities which impede disaster preparedness, response, and recovery. Understanding the unique social and economic fabric of an area can also help to identify the potential social costs of damage to key infrastructure such as housing, industry, public facilities or otherwise essential services, and transportation.
The demographics information contained herein for Town of Bayfield and surrounding areas has been post-processed based on the United States Census Bureau’s five-year estimate period from 2016-2021 and will not necessarily match the figures presented in other regional demographic studies or plans. Inherently, the margin of error for this data can be high, especially in more rural areas and for data collected at the block group level, which is made publicly available as spatial data files but not as a part of the Census’ tabular reporting. The figures referenced in this section are not intended to inform population counts for decision-making or administrative activities, but merely to explore larger trends in the region with relevance to mitigation planning efforts.
I. Population Trends
Population
The City of Town of Bayfield’s estimated population in 2021 was , according to the U.S. ACS 5-year survey, which is % of the total population of La Plata County, Bayfield. A more detailed time series of annual population change since 2008 is shown in the figure below, which is sourced from the U.S. Census Population Estimates Program (PEP). Caution should be used when interpreting PEP estimates from 2020 due to errors introduced in the Census’ methodology associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.
Total Population, 2008 - 2022 (Census PEP)
| Jurisdiction | Population | Households | Avg HH Size |
|---|---|---|---|
| La Plata County | 55,673 | 27,858 | 1.93 |
| Bayfield | 2,821 | 1,006 | 2.80 |
Population can also be explored on a geographic basis to determine areas of relatively high population density, which may warrant prioritization in the City’s mitigation strategy. The below map shows population across the planning area by block group.
Households
There were total households in Town of Bayfield in 2021, according to ACS 5-year estimates, with an average household size of individuals per household (excluding group quarters population such as residents of adult correctional facilities, military barracks, dormitories or nursing facilities). By comparison, average household size for La Plata County, Bayfield was 1.93, 2.8 individuals per household. Larger household size in a community typically indicates the presence of families and/or multi-generational living situations as opposed to senior households, which will be explored in section 2.
II. Introduction to Vulnerable Populations
Exploring local demographic data may help to identify groups and geographic areas with specific vulnerability to hazard events. Certain populations face greater risk following a natural hazard event due to age, economic mobility, physical disability, geographic location, or a combination of factors. Vulnerability in the face of a hazard event is not a fixed characteristic; the same individual may be at risk for some hazards but not others. For example, a low-income family without a car may be vulnerable to a wildfire or flood where a quick evacuation is necessary, but adequately prepared for an earthquake. Some individuals can reduce their personal vulnerability through mitigation, whereas others face more permanent vulnerability in the face of disaster; this is especially true for individuals who rely on caregiving networks to navigate daily life, such as children, the elderly, and persons with disabilities. (National Center for Disaster Preparedness, 2020) Inequality in the geographic distribution of environmental risk burden means that poor and marginalized communities are also more likely to live in hazard-prone neighborhoods with fewer mitigation resources.
In the context of all-hazards preparedness and response planning, at-risk individuals (often used interchangeably with “vulnerable populations”) are defined federally as “children, pregnant women, senior citizens, and other individuals who have access or functional needs in the event of a public health emergency.” (42 U.S.C. § 2802(b)(4)(B) (2019)) Examples of these populations may include, but are not limited to persons who are poor, disabled, who come from historically marginalized communities, who have limited English proficiency or are non-English speaking, who lack transportation, who are experiencing homelessness, or with chronic medical conditions. Planning for vulnerable populations in the context of hazard mitigation can help communities to prioritize limited resources where they will be the most effective.
Income and Housing
Economic mobility is one of the most important predictors of natural hazard vulnerability. Low-income residents are more likely to occupy housing which is inadequately maintained or otherwise poorly built to withstand extreme events. For example, mobile or modular homes are more susceptible to damage in earthquakes and floods than other types of residences and are less likely to contain A/C units to cope with high heat events. In urban areas, low-income residents are more likely to occupy older homes and apartment complexes with unreinforced masonry, which is particularly susceptible to seismic damage.
Renters are also more vulnerable to natural hazards, as they are less likely to take out property insurance and the decision to make major structural improvements typically lies with the property owner. Federal disaster recovery services can exacerbate inequality between renters and homeowners; payout amounts are significantly higher for homeowners applying through FEMA’s Individual Assistance (IA) program; from 1999 to 2013 U.S. homeowners saw their wealth increase with local hazard damages, whereas renters’ wealth decreased. (Howell & Elliott, 2019)
Approximately % of occupied housing units in Town of Bayfield were renters as of 2021, compared to 28, 21% for La Plata County, Bayfield as a whole (see below Table). Renters and owners as a proportion of housing tenure are also shown on a block group basis in the below figure.
| Jurisdiction | Total Occupied Housing Units | Renter Occupied / % | Owner Occupied / % |
|---|---|---|---|
| La Plata County | 22,266 | 6,229 / 28% | 16,037 / 72% |
| Bayfield | 928 | 191 / 21% | 737 / 79% |
Low-income households and communities face disproportionate financial burden from costs associated with disaster preparedness, response, and recovery. Disasters create unexpected expenses which may serve as “tipping points” for families and individuals living on the edge of poverty or homelessness. Recovery costs may be higher for those without resources to conduct hazard mitigation activities ahead of time. Families and individuals who lack access to transportation may be unable to evacuate ahead of an emergency. (Krause & Reeves, 2017)
Low-income residents and renters are also less likely to purchase insurance, meaning that those with the most to lose during an event are also the least prepared to deal with potential losses. Major hurricane events in recent history such as Harvey, Irma, and Katrina all demonstrate that low-income and/or historically marginalized communities face increased vulnerability to hazard events and struggle the most to recover. (Id.)
The median household income in Town of Bayfield in 2021 was , with an overall poverty rate of % (calculated as a % of total population over 15). By comparison, median income and poverty rates for La Plata County, Bayfield were $75,089, $76,176 and 9.7, 8.5%, respectively. (see Table below) Median income and poverty rates are also shown on the block group level in the below Figure.
| Jurisdiction | Median Income | Poverty Rate |
|---|---|---|
| La Plata County | $75,089 | 9.71% |
| Bayfield | $76,176 | 8.52% |
Age
Age plays a significant role in vulnerability to natural hazards, as both seniors and children are dependent populations who rely on caregiver networks for support and protection. Seniors may have mobility challenges and increased health concerns, necessitating assistance during evacuations and recovery. Similarly, children have limited ability to protect themselves and depend on caregivers to ensure their safety and well-being during emergencies. When combined with factors such as low-income status of a household, age vulnerabilities can be further compounded, highlighting the importance of targeted interventions to address the unique needs of these populations.
Approximately % of households in Town of Bayfield include at least one senior individual (over 65 years of age), % of whom experience poverty (see Table below). Additionally, seniors over 65 living alone constitute of total households in Town of Bayfield, or households in total. Seniors living alone may have more difficulty evacuating during an emergency, especially for individuals with mobility challenges and those who lack internet access and/or internet literacy. Assisted-living facilities usually require extra notice and coordination to implement evacuation and are typically identified as “critical facilities” by emergency managers. Areas of the city with relatively high concentrations of seniors are shown in the Figure below.
Children often depend on family and caregivers to navigate daily life. As such, their resilience during and after a natural disaster is only as strong as the networks of care upon which they rely. Approximately % of households include at least one minor under the age of 18, and % of whom represent single-caregiver households. (see Table below) Disasters may have profound and detrimental long-term effects on children, and care should be taken to minimize disruption to social networks and lifelines serving children and families following a disaster event.
| Jurisdiction | Total Households (HH) | HH with 65+ / % HH | HH with 65+ & Living Alone / % HH | HH with 65+ & Poverty / % HH | HH with >18 / % HH | HH with >18 & 1 Caregiver / % HH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| La Plata County | 27,858 | 6,978 / 25% | 1,818 / 6.5% | 365 / 1.3% | 5,704 / 20.5% | 1,297 / 4.7% |
| Bayfield | 1,006 | 219 / 21.8% | 94 / 9.3% | 5 / 0.5% | 445 / 44.2% | 98 / 9.7% |
Race / Ethnicity
Natural disasters compound racial disparities; non-white individuals and communities receive less recovery aid from FEMA than their white counterparts, even where the amount of damage is the same. (Howell & Elliott, 2019) (National Advisory Council, 2020) The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is a glaring testament to racial disparities in disaster outcomes, with non-white persons facing morbidity rates from COVID-19 infections anywhere from 70-350% higher than white, non-Hispanic persons. (CDC, 2020)
These disparities are evidence of the complicated relationship between disaster recovery and overlapping social vulnerabilities including race, income, language, and health. Black and Latino residents are more likely to be low income and renters, conditions which create obstacles to navigating FEMA individual assistance programs. Communities with more non-white residents may have lower tax revenue and property values, which means less investment in mitigation and rebuilding efforts before and after an emergency. Finally, a legacy of residential segregation and discriminatory redlining policies can force marginalized groups into areas with greater environmental risk burden, including higher exposure to natural hazards and pollution and lower access to open space. (Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, 2018)
The figure below compares Town of Bayfield’s population by race/ethnicity to La Plata County, Bayfield as a whole. Note that percentage values will add up to over 100% of population, as Hispanic/Non-Hispanic status is collected independently of other racial categories (i.e., White, Black, Pacific Islander).
Language
Individuals with no or limited English-speaking ability may be unable to access up-to-date emergency information and have difficulty navigating recovery programs. Approximately % of households in Town of Bayfield ( in total) are Spanish-speaking, with % of those households ( in total) speaking no or limited English. The distribution of Spanish-speaking households with limited English is also shown on a block group basis in the below Figure.
| Jurisdiction | Total Households (HH) | Spanish-Speaking / % HH | Spanish-Speaking, limited English / % HH | Other Language, limited English / % HH |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| La Plata County | 27,858 | 1,733 / 6.2% | 49 / 0.2% | 16 / 0.1% |
| Bayfield | 1,006 | 77 / 7.7% | 0 / 0% | 0 / 0% |
Access and Functional Needs
Access and functional needs may interfere with the ability to access or receive medical care before, during, or after a disaster or emergency. Irrespective of a specific diagnosis, status, or label, the term “access and functional needs” refers to a broad set of needs, generally distinguished into access-based or function-based needs according to the following parameters:
Access-based needs require that resources are designed with accessible to all individuals, such as social services, accommodations, information, transportation, and medications to maintain health.
Function-based needs refer to restrictions or limitations an individual may have that require assistance before, during, and after a disaster or public health emergency.
A recommended approach for integrating the access and functional needs of these individuals into a planning context is to consider elements based on the following “CMIST” framework, commonly implemented by public health practitioners and emergency managers:
Communication – Individuals who have limitations in the reciept or response to emergency information require information to be provided in an accessible format. This can include individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, individuals with limited or no English proficiency, individuals who are blind or have low vision, and individuals who have cognitive or physiological disabilities.
Maintaining Health – Ensure continuity of care for individuals who require Personal Assistance Services (or personal care assistance) to meet daily needs such as eating, dressing, grooming, transferring, and toileting.
Independence – Consideration of individuals who may function independently contingent on the functionality of assistive devices, such as consumable medical supplies (diapers, formula, bandages, ostomy supplies, etc.), durable medical equipment (wheelchairs, walkers, scooters, etc.), or service animals.
Services and Support – Includes support for individuals with behavioral health needs, those who have psychiatric conditions (such as dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, Schizophrenia, severe mental illness), pregnant women, nursing mothers, infants, and children.
Transportation – Includes individuals with transportation needs because of age, disability, temporary injury, poverty, addiction, legal restriction, or those who do not have access to a vehicle. This requires advance coordination to ensure access to mass transit and accessible vehicles such as paratransit. (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2016)
While most individuals with access and functional needs do not have acute medical needs requiring the support of trained medical professionals, many will require assistance during an evacuation and in the aftermath of a natural disaster to maintain health and minimize preventable medical conditions. These individuals may require more time and assistance during an evacuation. Approximately % of Town of Bayfield’s population lives with some form of disability, according to the Census ACS, warranting special attention from emergency managers and planners. Additionally, % of households lack access to a vehicle. In the event of an emergency, families without personal transportation may face barriers to accessing essential medical services and a limited ability to rapidly evacuate an at-risk area.
| Jurisdiction | Total Population (Pop) | Persons with a Disability / % Pop | Persons Reliant on Public Transit / % Pop | Total Households (HH) | Households with no Vehicle / % HH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| La Plata County | 55,673 | 5,265 / 9.5% | 162 / 0.3% | 27,858 | 438 / 1.6% |
| Bayfield | 2,821 | 250 / 8.9% | 0 / 0% | 1,006 | 8 / 0.8% |
CDC Social Vulnerability Index (SVI)
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) attempts to further quantify social vulnerability as it pertains to all-hazards mitigation planning by stewarding a composite index called the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), which ranks Census Tracts on the basis of 16 different Census variables to identify at-risk populations. The four main themes the SVI uses to rank communities’ percentile distribution on the basis of social vulnerability to public health emergencies and natural hazard events include socioeconomic status, housing type/transportation, racial and ethnic minority status, and household characteristics. Tracts in the top 10%, i.e., at the 90th percentile of SVI values, are considered highest vulnerability.
