Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
2014
Contents
Executive Summary................................................................................................................................... 4
Introduction.............................................................................................................................................. 5
National and State-Level Trends................................................................................................................ 6
Variation by Income.................................................................................................................................. 7
Variation by Race and Ethnicity................................................................................................................ 8
Discussion............................................................................................................................................... 11
Suggested Citation.................................................................................................................................. 12
References............................................................................................................................................... 12
Appendix: Data and Methods ................................................................................................................. 13
All-State Tables...................................................................................................................................14-20
State Fact Sheets.................................................................................................................................21-72
About SHADAC..................................................................................................................................... 73
Executive Summary
Reducing the number of children without health
insurance coverage has long been a focus of national and
state health policy. This report documents recent coverage
trends at the state level using data from 2008 through
2012, the most recent year available.
Several encouraging trends emerge from the data:
Introduction
Reducing the number of children who lack health
insurance coverage has been a focus of state and federal
policy since the mid-1990s. While most children who
have coverage receive it through private sources, Medicaid
and the Childrens Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
provide access to health insurance coverage for lowincome children, and the importance of Medicaid and
CHIP as a source of coverage for children has grown over
time.
Appendices:
Data and methods
Detailed 50-state tables that allow for easy cross-state
and national comparisons of trends over time
For the U.S. as a whole and for each state individually,
a one-page at a glance graphic summary of trends in
childrens health insurance coverage1
Standalone two-page summaries for each state that include the data
points for all of the charts are available at www.shadac.org/kids2014.
1
70%
60%
64.5%
59.0%*
50%
40%
33.6%*
30%
25.8%
20%
9.7%
10%
7.5%*
0%
Private
Public
2008
Uninsured
2012
Source:
2008
2012 American
Community
as analyzed by SHADAC.
Source: 2008
and and
2012 American
Community Surveys
as analyzedSurveys
by SHADAC.
*Indicates statistically significant difference from 2008 (95% level).
Variation by Income
Although the rate of uninsurance for children declined
nationally and in 35 states from 2008 to 2012, there are
still substantial variations across states and within states
by income level. At the national level, Figure 6 illustrates
the trend in uninsurance by income level. The percentage
of children with private coverage declined nationwide
for both low income (0-138% FPG)2 and middle
income (139-400% FPG) children. This was particularly
evidenced in Rhode Island and New Hampshire, where
private coverage for low income children dropped by
over 18 percentage points in each state (Appendix Table
2). High income children (401%+ FPG) nationally saw a
modest gain in private health insurance coverage, at 0.2
percent. The percentage of children with public coverage
increased nationally and in nearly all states. This trend was
especially pronounced for children at low income levels;
FIGURE 4. TREND IN CHILDRENS FAMILY INCOME
LEVELS
45%
States with
largest changes in
private
coverage
41.9%
39.0%*
40%
35.6%*
35%
30%
29.3%
28.9%
25.5%*
25%
States with
largest changes in
public
coverage
20%
15%
States with
largest changes in
uninsurance rate
10%
5%
0%
0-138% FPG
139-400% FPG
2008
401%+ FPG
2012
Source:
2008
American
Surveys
as analyzed by SHADAC.
Source: 2008
andand
2012 2012
American
Community Community
Surveys as analyzed
by SHADAC.
*Indicates statistically significant difference from 2008 (95% level).
Percentage
point change
1. Montana
-12.3%
2. Hawaii
-11.2%
3. Rhode Island
-9.1%
4. Florida
-7.8%
4. Oregon
-7.8%
1. Montana
15.7%
2. Oregon
14.1%
3. Florida
13.9%
4. Nevada
11.3%
5. Hawaii
11.0%
1. Oregon
-6.4%
2. Florida
-6.1%
3. Delaware
-5.2%
3. Mississippi
-5.2%
4. South Dakota
-5.1%
15.5%
10.4%*
10.6%
8.3%*
17.6%
21.3%*
71.9%
70.4%*
2008
2012
69.6%*
60.9%
23.6%
20.0%*
2008
2012
0-138% FPG
2.3%*
2.4%*
95.0%
95.3%*
2008
2012
139-400% FPG
Private
Public
401%+ FPG
Uninsured
1. Massachusetts
2. Maine
3. Illinois
3. West Virginia
5. Hawaii
2.0%
4.0%
4.8%
4.8%
5.1%
1. Nevada
2. Utah
3. Alaska
4. Montana
5. Arizona
26.6%
18.4%
16.9%
15.9%
15.5%
Percent
Uninsured
139-400%
FPG
1. Massachusetts
2. Hawaii
3. Alabama
4. Delaware
5. Michigan
1.6%
3.0%
3.7%
4.0%
4.2%
1. Texas
2. Arizona
3. Nevada
4. Alaska
5. Montana
15.9%
15.3%
13.8%
13.7%
12.9%
Percent
Uninsured
401%+
FPG
1. Massachusetts
2. Minnesota
3. Alabama
4. Connecticut
4. Illinois
0.7%
0.9%
1.1%
1.3%
1.3%
1. Texas
2. Oklahoma
3. Arizona
4. Nevada
5. Louisiana
5.1%
4.6%
4.5%
4.2%
3.9%
15.5%
14%
12%
10%
10.4%*
10.6%
8.3%*
8%
6%
4%
2.9%
2%
2.9%
2.1%
2.3%*
0%
0-138% FPG
139-400% FPG
2008
2012
401%+ FPG
Source: 2008 and 2012 American Community Surveys as analyzed by SHADAC. Family
Source: 2008
and 2012 American
Communicy Surveys
as analyzed
by SHADAC.
income
measured
as a percentage
of federal
poverty
guidelines.
*Indicates
difference
from 2008 (95% level).
Family incomestatistically
measured as a significant
percentage of federal
poverty guidelines.
4.5*
11.6*
6.9*
6.4*
6.3*
6.2*
5.7*
5.6*
5.3*
5.2*
5.0*
4.9*
4.8*
4.7*
4.7*
4.7*
4.5*
4.2*
4.2*
4.1*
4.1*
4.1*
4.0*
3.9*
3.9*
3.7*
3.6*
3.6*
3.5*
3.4*
3.3*
2.9*
2.9*
2.7*
1.7*
1.6*
0
6.5%
5.4%*
16.3%
21.5%*
77.2%
9.6%
7.1%*
35.9%
43.5%*
18.3%
12.6%*
40.1%
50.7%*
41.5%
36.7%*
2008
2012
73.2%*
54.5%
2008
2012
49.4%*
2008
White
2012
Non-white
Private
Public
Hispanic
Uninsured
White
1. Massachusetts
2.Connecticut
2. Maryland
3. Illinois
4.Vermont
1.Massachusetts
2.District of Columbia
Non-White 3.Delaware
4. Hawaii
5. Maryland
Hispanic
1. Illinois
2. Alaska
3. New York
4. Connecticut
5. Michigan
1.Nevada
2.Montana
3.Wyoming
4. Alaska
5.Florida
11.2%
10.0%
9.0%
8.9%
8.7%
1.8%
3.3%
3.7%
3.9%
4.1%
1. Montana
2.Alaska
3.North Dakota
4.Oklahoma
5.New Mexico
22.6%
20.9%
19.1%
15.1%
15.0%
4.3%
5.0%
5.2%
5.5%
6.3%
1.Utah
2.Nevada
3.Georgia
4.South Carolina
4. Wyoming
25.0%
24.8%
20.5%
19.1%
19.1%
10
15
Notes: * Indicates ratio is significantly different from one at the 95% level. Analysis by family income
is based
on the
income
of the health
insuranceSurvey
unit. Estimates
relativeby
standard
errors greater
Source:
2012
American
Community
(ACS), aswith
analyzed
SHADAC.
Indicates ratio is significantly different from one at the 95% level. Analysis by family
than*income
30% areisexcluded.
based on the income of the health insurance unit. Estimates with relative
standard
errors greater
thanSurvey
30% are
excluded.
Source:
2012 American
Community
(ACS),
as analyzed by SHADAC.
18.3%
18%
16%
14%
12.6%*
12%
9.6%
10%
8%
6%
6.5%
7.1%*
5.4%*
4%
2%
0%
White
Non-white
2008
Hispanic
2012
Source:
2008
Community
Surveys
as analyzed by SHADAC.
Source: 2008
andand
2012 2012
AmericanAmerican
Communicy Surveys
as analyzed
by SHADAC.
*Indicates statistically significant difference from 2008 (95% level).
10
1.3*
2.7*
4.0*
2.6*
2.3*
2.3*
2.3*
2.2*
2.2*
1.9*
1.8*
1.7*
1.7*
1.6*
1.5*
1.5*
1.5*
1.4*
1.4
1.4
1.4*
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.2*
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.8*
0
Notes: *2012
Indicates
ratio isCommunity
significantly different
from one
at the 95%bylevel.
Estimates with relative standard
Source:
American
Survey (ACS),
as analyzed
SHADAC.
*errors
Indicates
ratio
different from one at the 95% level.
greater
thanis significantly
30% are excluded.
Source: 2012 American Community Survey (ACS), as analyzed by SHADAC.
2.3*
4.8*
4.2*
4.1*
3.7*
3.6*
3.5*
3.0*
3.0*
2.9*
2.9*
2.8*
2.6*
2.5*
2.5*
2.5*
2.3*
2.3*
2.2*
2.2*
2.2*
2.1*
2.1*
2.1*
2.1*
2.0*
2.0*
2.0*
1.9
1.7*
1.7*
1.7
1.6*
1.6*
1.5*
1.5*
1.5
1.5*
1.5*
1.4
Discussion
Over the past decade and a half, much progress has been
made on ensuring access to health insurance coverage for
children. Despite recent economic challenges, the rate of
uninsurance for children has declined. In fact, the largest
coverage gains have been made by children that have
historically had the highest rates of uninsurance lowincome children and non-white and Hispanic children. As
a result, disparities in coverage rates between low-income
and higher-income children and across racial and ethnic
groups have narrowed over time.
Still, more could be done to reduce uninsurance
among children. As documented by this report, there is
substantial variation across states and within states that
illustrates some key opportunities for doing so. Although
estimated participation rates in Medicaid and CHIP are
high (Kenney et al., 2013), a large share of the remaining
uninsured are likely eligible for these programs but not
enrolled.
Suggested Citation
Sonier, J., Fried, B. 2014. State-Level Trends in Childrens
Health Insurance Coverage. Minneapolis, MN: State
Health Access Data Assistance Center.
References
Clemens-Cope LC, Kenney GM, Pantell M, Perry CD.
2007. Access to Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance
among Low-Income Families: Who Has Access and Who
Doesnt? The Urban Institute.
Kenney GM, Anderson N, and Lynch V. Medicaid/
CHIP Participation Rates Among Children: An Update.
Urban Institute and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
September 2013.
12
SHADAC and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Defining Family for Studies of Health Insurance Coverage. March 2012. Available at: http://
www.shadac.org/files/shadac/publications/SHADAC_Brief27.pdf
2
The poverty guidelines are updated periodically in the Federal Register by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the
authority of 42 U.S.C. 9902(2). The 2012 edition can be found at http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/12poverty.shtml/
3
Variance Estimation-Chapter 12. ACS Design and Methodology. Found at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/survey_methodology/
acs_design_methodology_ch12.pdf
APPENDIX TABLE 1:
TREND IN COVERAGE FOR CHILDREN
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
United States
Private Coverage
Percent Point
2008
2012
Change
Count
%
Count
%
747,465
124,556
1,015,675
375,707
5,965,353
877,140
650,948
152,635
70,530
2,490,009
1,587,813
240,554
284,469
2,258,097
1,128,901
559,516
525,407
664,270
618,330
191,860
1,056,115
1,189,728
1,741,633
1,042,749
404,647
994,878
162,011
361,086
470,186
240,216
1,601,909
252,294
3,137,188
1,442,883
115,708
2,023,478
542,088
629,500
2,091,015
181,336
696,183
143,650
995,805
3,808,406
674,869
90,235
1,463,414
1,122,575
244,088
1,044,038
98,801
50,591,947
62.7%
66.1%
56.3%
50.5%
60.0%
68.9%
75.3%
69.5%
56.6%
58.6%
59.0%
79.6%
64.9%
66.8%
67.3%
74.4%
71.6%
62.5%
52.8%
64.9%
74.2%
77.7%
68.1%
78.5%
49.8%
66.5%
65.8%
75.1%
67.1%
76.9%
74.0%
47.4%
66.6%
60.7%
78.5%
69.9%
56.4%
68.2%
70.9%
75.1%
61.2%
66.7%
64.2%
53.7%
75.4%
64.8%
75.3%
68.3%
60.5%
75.1%
71.2%
64.5%
672,382
116,607
897,346
357,119
5,370,586
824,424
575,310
138,780
65,578
2,149,106
1,437,395
218,838
276,500
1,949,663
1,035,011
523,459
491,235
629,975
572,019
168,014
963,555
1,077,529
1,471,181
981,843
360,984
905,755
124,340
339,743
412,483
203,255
1,473,358
254,557
2,783,420
1,334,981
128,753
1,776,026
514,088
549,384
1,881,874
154,783
622,709
144,323
934,652
3,627,779
673,422
77,781
1,408,245
1,056,212
246,002
958,630
95,246
46,006,240
56.5%
60.5%
52.5%
47.8%
54.9%
63.2%
67.9%
63.8%
54.2%
50.7%
54.5%
68.4%
62.0%
60.2%
61.7%
68.8%
64.4%
58.7%
48.4%
58.6%
67.8%
71.7%
61.1%
72.8%
45.2%
61.3%
53.4%
68.9%
59.5%
69.6%
68.9%
46.4%
61.5%
55.1%
78.0%
63.2%
51.8%
60.5%
64.6%
66.1%
53.9%
66.8%
59.0%
49.3%
72.8%
58.3%
71.3%
63.3%
60.2%
68.3%
66.0%
59.0%
Public Coverage
Percent Point
2008
2012
2008
Change
Count
%
Count
%
Count
%
-6.2% ***
348,165
-5.6% **
40,152
-3.8% ***
504,828
-2.8% *
302,788
-5.1% *** 2,913,888
-5.7% ***
224,490
-7.4% ***
169,259
-5.7% **
47,533
-2.4%
50,316
-7.8% *** 1,021,342
-4.5% ***
795,033
-11.2% ***
52,389
-2.9%
96,926
-6.6% ***
931,128
-5.6% ***
387,867
-5.7% ***
156,218
-7.2% ***
147,562
-3.8% ***
333,932
-4.4% ***
461,043
-6.3% ***
87,549
-6.4% ***
289,134
-6.0% ***
314,289
-7.0% ***
682,322
-5.6% ***
206,911
-4.6% ***
303,457
-5.3% ***
393,392
-12.3% ***
47,403
-6.2% ***
84,011
-7.7% ***
85,596
-7.3% ***
55,292
-5.1% ***
407,140
-1.0%
208,974
-5.1% *** 1,307,750
-5.5% ***
695,673
-0.6%
20,872
-6.7% ***
668,878
-4.6% ***
301,053
-7.8% ***
179,351
-6.3% ***
676,412
-9.1% ***
46,794
-7.3% ***
309,999
0.1%
51,943
-5.1% ***
444,783
-4.4% *** 2,054,597
-2.6% *
108,848
-6.4% **
43,673
-4.0% ***
331,532
-5.0% ***
387,853
-0.4%
131,922
-6.7% ***
279,033
-5.1% *
26,852
-5.5% *** 20,218,147
29.2%
21.3%
28.0%
40.7%
29.3%
17.6%
19.6%
21.6%
40.4%
24.0%
29.5%
17.3%
22.1%
27.5%
23.1%
20.8%
20.1%
31.4%
39.4%
29.6%
20.3%
20.5%
26.7%
15.6%
37.4%
26.3%
19.3%
17.5%
12.2%
17.7%
18.8%
39.2%
27.8%
29.2%
14.2%
23.1%
31.3%
19.4%
22.9%
19.4%
27.3%
24.1%
28.7%
29.0%
12.2%
31.3%
17.1%
23.6%
32.7%
20.1%
19.3%
25.8%
465,523
50,473
585,634
346,890
3,583,063
363,672
239,045
70,866
52,245
1,606,267
953,847
90,669
133,958
1,171,095
505,334
202,852
215,140
374,720
542,695
104,983
398,471
404,887
827,847
288,002
376,346
459,557
81,246
124,151
163,283
76,015
549,252
247,413
1,547,339
903,312
24,122
873,559
373,059
305,091
878,996
65,980
435,881
62,812
554,607
2,782,706
160,805
51,544
449,541
515,151
144,396
375,556
34,279
26,194,177
39.1%
26.2%
34.3%
46.4%
36.7%
27.9%
28.2%
32.6%
43.1%
37.9%
36.1%
28.3%
30.0%
36.2%
30.1%
26.6%
28.2%
34.9%
45.9%
36.6%
28.1%
26.9%
34.4%
21.4%
47.1%
31.1%
34.9%
25.2%
23.5%
26.0%
25.7%
45.1%
34.2%
37.3%
14.6%
31.1%
37.6%
33.6%
30.2%
28.2%
37.7%
29.1%
35.0%
37.8%
17.4%
38.7%
22.8%
30.9%
35.3%
26.8%
23.8%
33.6%
Uninsured
2012
Count
%
9.9% ***
96,715 8.1%
52,118
4.9% **
23,643 12.6%
25,624
6.3% *** 284,037 15.7%
225,478
5.7% ***
65,102 8.8%
43,893
7.3% *** 1,057,417 10.6%
823,812
10.3% *** 171,499 13.5%
116,436
8.6% ***
44,105 5.1%
32,815
10.9% ***
19,509 8.9%
7,927
2.8%
3,807 3.1%
3,276
13.9% *** 740,325 17.4%
481,321
6.6% *** 309,165 11.5%
247,753
11.0% ***
9,242 3.1%
10,564
7.9% ***
57,064 13.0%
35,774
8.6% *** 192,255 5.7%
117,289
7.0% *** 161,055 9.6%
137,342
5.9% ***
36,020 4.8%
35,098
8.1% ***
60,621 8.3%
56,028
3.5% ***
64,828 6.1%
68,486
6.6% ***
92,234 7.9%
67,617
7.0% ***
16,207 5.5%
13,817
7.7% ***
78,411 5.5%
58,651
6.4% ***
27,304 1.8%
20,801
7.7% *** 135,446 5.3%
108,804
5.8% ***
79,482 6.0%
78,592
9.8% *** 104,446 12.9%
61,471
4.8% ***
106,800 7.1%
113,115
15.7% ***
36,888 15.0%
27,066
7.7% ***
35,609 7.4%
29,061
11.3% ***
144,641 20.7%
117,934
8.3% ***
16,697 5.4%
12,727
6.9% ***
155,878 7.2%
114,774
5.8% ***
71,574 13.4%
47,238
6.4% *** 264,699 5.6%
194,089
8.1% *** 240,663 10.1%
183,108
10,775 7.3%
12,268
0.5%
8.0% *** 201,984 7.0%
160,558
6.3% *** 118,799 12.4%
105,645
14.1% *** 113,896 12.3%
54,201
7.3% *** 181,822 6.2%
150,972
8.8% ***
13,187 5.5%
13,559
10.5% *** 130,637 11.5%
96,782
5.0% *
19,914 9.2%
9,020
6.4% *** 111,615 7.2%
93,840
8.8% *** 1,230,475 17.4%
954,060
5.2% *** 111,209 12.4%
91,026
7.3% **
5,438 3.9%
3,996
5.7% *** 148,450 7.6%
116,848
7.3% *** 134,082 8.2%
98,416
27,191 6.7%
18,501
2.6%
6.7% ***
67,784 4.9%
68,587
4.4% *
13,216 9.5%
14,728
7.8% *** 7,643,862 9.7% 5,832,906
Percent
Point Change
4.4%
13.3%
13.2%
5.9%
8.4%
8.9%
3.9%
3.6%
2.7%
11.4%
9.4%
3.3%
8.0%
3.6%
8.2%
4.6%
7.4%
6.4%
5.7%
4.8%
4.1%
1.4%
4.5%
5.8%
7.7%
7.7%
11.6%
5.9%
17.0%
4.4%
5.4%
8.6%
4.3%
7.6%
7.4%
5.7%
10.6%
6.0%
5.2%
5.8%
8.4%
4.2%
5.9%
13.0%
9.8%
3.0%
5.9%
5.9%
4.5%
4.9%
10.2%
7.5%
Notes: Significant difference between periods is indicated by confidence levels of: *= 90%, **= 95%, ***= 99%. Estimates reflect the primary source of coverage.
Source: 2008 & 2012 American Community Surveys as analyzed by SHADAC.
Notes: Significant difference between periods is indicated by confidence levels of: *= 90%, **= 95%, ***= 99%. Estimates reflect the primary source of coverage.
Source: 2008 & 2012 American Community Surveys as analyzed by SHADAC.
14
-3.7% ***
0.8%
-2.5% ***
-2.9% ***
-2.2% ***
-4.5% ***
-1.2% **
-5.2% ***
-0.3%
-6.1% ***
-2.1% ***
0.2%
-5.0% ***
-2.1% ***
-1.4% ***
-0.2%
-0.9%
0.3%
-2.2% ***
-0.7%
-1.4% ***
-0.4%
-0.8% **
-0.2%
-5.2% ***
0.5%
-3.4% *
-1.5% *
-3.7% ***
-1.0%
-1.8% ***
-4.8% ***
-1.3% ***
-2.6% ***
0.1%
-1.3% ***
-1.7% ***
-6.4% ***
-1.0% ***
0.3%
-3.1% ***
-5.1% ***
-1.3% ***
-4.4% ***
-2.6% ***
-0.9%
-1.7% ***
-2.3% ***
-2.2% ***
0.0%
0.7%
-2.3% ***
APPENDIX TABLE 2:
TREND IN THE PERCENT OF CHILDREN COVERED BY PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE BY INCOME CATEGORY
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
United States
2008
%
23.7%
26.8%
18.2%
14.7%
22.0%
25.5%
26.0%
27.2%
15.9%
21.5%
22.3%
51.6%
29.7%
22.2%
25.1%
31.1%
30.6%
22.6%
18.9%
24.5%
28.1%
29.8%
25.8%
32.6%
18.4%
24.2%
26.5%
30.8%
32.4%
41.2%
25.6%
15.4%
26.6%
20.6%
34.1%
24.9%
22.8%
30.1%
28.8%
35.7%
22.3%
25.6%
25.9%
17.6%
37.5%
20.2%
31.3%
24.8%
20.9%
29.2%
30.9%
23.6%
0-138% FPG
Percent Point
2012
%
Change
20.0%
-3.7% **
24.9%
-1.9%
17.3%
-0.9%
12.8%
-1.8%
19.1%
-2.9% ***
22.0%
-3.5% *
19.3%
-6.7% ***
22.9%
-4.3%
16.5%
0.6%
16.5%
-5.0% ***
19.5%
-2.8% ***
38.4% -13.2% ***
25.5%
-4.2%
18.2%
-4.0% ***
21.5%
-3.6% **
24.7%
-6.4% ***
22.1%
-8.5% ***
20.2%
-2.4%
15.4%
-3.6% ***
17.1%
-7.5%
21.1%
-7.0% ***
23.1%
-6.7% ***
20.8%
-4.9% ***
23.6%
-9.0% ***
14.7%
-3.7% **
23.0%
-1.1%
19.0%
-7.5% *
23.4%
-7.4% *
24.9%
-7.6% ***
23.1% -18.1% ***
22.9%
-2.7%
17.3%
1.9%
24.0%
-2.6% ***
18.2%
-2.4% **
38.6%
4.6%
21.9%
-3.0% ***
16.2%
-6.5% ***
23.5%
-6.7% ***
24.5%
-4.3% ***
17.4% -18.3% ***
17.8%
-4.5% ***
24.9%
-0.7%
22.5%
-3.4% ***
14.9%
-2.7% ***
33.3%
-4.2%
24.2%
4.0%
28.7%
-2.6%
23.9%
-0.9%
19.8%
-1.2%
21.5%
-7.7% ***
29.5%
-1.3%
20.0%
-3.6% ***
139-400% FPG
Percent Point
2008
2012
%
%
Change
75.8%
73.2%
-2.6%
75.2%
70.1%
-5.1%
66.0%
69.5%
3.4% **
62.8%
64.2%
1.4%
65.0%
65.7%
0.7%
74.1%
70.0%
-4.0% ***
72.5%
65.8%
-6.7% ***
74.9%
72.4%
-2.6%
61.4%
56.0%
-5.4%
64.1%
62.6%
-1.5%
66.7%
68.1%
1.4%
86.2%
80.2%
-6.0% ***
74.3%
77.8%
3.4%
72.9%
69.2%
-3.8% ***
77.8%
76.4%
-1.4%
82.9%
77.2%
-5.7% ***
79.0%
76.5%
-2.6%
77.8%
78.6%
0.8%
59.9%
62.1%
2.2%
73.3%
68.7%
-4.6%
71.3%
68.3%
-3.1% **
79.6%
74.7%
-4.8% ***
79.6%
77.2%
-2.4% **
82.6%
80.5%
-2.2%
64.7%
66.8%
2.1%
77.7%
76.3%
-1.4%
75.8%
61.2%
-14.6% ***
83.9%
81.3%
-2.5%
73.8%
76.2%
2.4%
69.0%
67.8%
-1.2%
73.2%
68.6%
-4.5% ***
58.9%
60.4%
1.5%
72.5%
70.2%
-2.3% ***
69.4%
69.9%
0.5%
88.2%
79.0%
-9.2% **
81.5%
79.4%
-2.0% ***
66.9%
65.2%
-1.7%
76.9%
72.3%
-4.6% ***
77.4%
73.8%
-3.7% ***
76.3%
79.8%
3.6%
73.0%
71.2%
-1.8%
76.8%
78.4%
1.6%
77.6%
76.5%
-1.1%
62.5%
60.9%
-1.5% **
80.8%
85.9%
5.1% ***
62.6%
55.3%
-7.3% *
80.4%
77.2%
-3.2% ***
71.2%
67.9%
-3.3% **
75.4%
75.5%
0.0%
81.7%
80.5%
-1.2%
73.9%
73.9%
0.0%
71.9%
70.4%
-1.4% ***
2008
%
94.9%
94.2%
94.4%
92.6%
94.4%
95.9%
97.7%
93.9%
95.8%
91.7%
93.0%
96.3%
93.9%
95.4%
96.0%
97.0%
96.2%
96.3%
92.1%
94.1%
96.5%
97.7%
95.9%
97.5%
91.6%
96.2%
93.2%
98.2%
92.0%
96.5%
96.5%
89.8%
95.4%
94.6%
98.9%
96.5%
93.3%
95.4%
96.0%
96.9%
93.8%
97.0%
95.7%
92.2%
95.9%
95.5%
97.0%
95.6%
95.9%
97.3%
94.2%
95.0%
401%+ FPG
Percent Point
2012
%
Change
96.1%
1.1%
91.9%
-2.3%
94.0%
-0.5%
92.8%
0.1%
94.8%
0.4%
95.3%
-0.6%
96.8%
-0.9% *
95.8%
1.9%
95.5%
-0.3%
93.0%
1.3% **
95.4%
2.5% ***
97.8%
1.6%
93.9%
-0.1%
96.0%
0.6%
96.4%
0.4%
95.3%
-1.8% *
96.4%
0.2%
95.4%
-0.9%
90.7%
-1.4%
94.6%
0.5%
96.3%
-0.2%
97.4%
-0.3%
95.6%
-0.3%
98.1%
0.6%
90.7%
-0.9%
95.9%
-0.3%
94.8%
1.6%
98.6%
0.4%
93.6%
1.6%
97.8%
1.3%
96.5%
0.0%
91.5%
1.7%
95.3%
-0.1%
94.6%
0.0%
93.7%
-5.2% ***
96.8%
0.3%
91.8%
-1.5%
96.8%
1.4%
96.5%
0.5%
96.0%
-0.9%
93.7%
-0.1%
95.5%
-1.4%
96.0%
0.3%
92.6%
0.3%
95.1%
-0.8%
94.8%
-0.6%
96.4%
-0.6%
95.6%
0.0%
94.5%
-1.4%
96.9%
-0.4%
93.5%
-0.7%
95.3%
0.2% **
Notes: Significant
difference
between between
periods is indicated
by confidence
levelsby
of:confidence
*= 90%, **= 95%,
***=
Estimates
primary
source
of coverage.
FPG = the
Federal
Poverty
Notes:
Significant
difference
periods
is indicated
levels
of:99%.
*= 90%,
**=reflect
95%,the
***=
99%.
Estimates
reflect
primary
Guidelinesofestablished
by the
U.S.= Department
of Health and
Human Services.
Analysis bybyfamily
is based on the of
income
of theand
health
insuranceServices.
unit.
source
coverage.
FPG
Federal Poverty
Guidelines
established
the income
U.S. Department
Health
Human
Analysis by family
Source: 2008
& 2012 on
American
CommunityofSurveys
as analyzed
by SHADAC.
income
is based
the income
the health
insurance
unit.
Source: 2008 & 2012 American Community Surveys as analyzed by SHADAC.
State-Level Trends in Childrens Health Insurance Coverage 2014 | www.shadac.org 15
APPENDIX TABLE 3:
TREND IN THE PERCENT OF CHILDREN COVERED BY PUBLIC HEALTH INSURANCE BY INCOME CATEGORY
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
United States
2008
%
63.0%
53.8%
58.9%
75.2%
61.6%
47.3%
65.2%
59.3%
80.9%
51.6%
59.6%
43.9%
53.4%
68.5%
60.6%
59.7%
55.0%
69.0%
71.1%
71.4%
60.6%
66.8%
65.8%
55.1%
65.3%
66.2%
50.7%
53.2%
32.8%
51.7%
61.1%
65.9%
65.2%
64.6%
48.3%
63.8%
63.2%
49.7%
59.9%
56.1%
61.0%
63.9%
64.4%
58.7%
36.7%
76.9%
54.0%
61.9%
69.7%
61.3%
51.9%
60.9%
0-138% FPG
Percent Point
2012
Change
%
73.3%
10.3% ***
58.2%
4.4%
67.2%
8.3% ***
81.6%
6.4% ***
69.3%
7.6% ***
65.8%
18.5% ***
74.0%
8.8% ***
71.9%
12.7% **
80.5%
-0.4%
69.2%
17.6% ***
67.0%
7.4% ***
56.5%
12.6% ***
63.6%
10.2% ***
77.0%
8.6% ***
67.8%
7.2% ***
68.7%
8.9% ***
66.6%
11.6% ***
71.1%
2.1%
77.9%
6.8% ***
79.0%
7.6%
71.9%
11.2% ***
74.9%
8.1% ***
72.4%
6.6% ***
65.6%
10.5% ***
76.3%
11.0% ***
65.9%
-0.3%
65.1%
14.4% ***
65.6%
12.5% ***
48.5%
15.7% ***
70.1%
18.5% ***
67.6%
6.6% ***
70.8%
4.9% *
69.9%
4.8% ***
72.2%
7.6% ***
51.1%
2.8%
70.4%
6.6% ***
70.7%
7.5% ***
70.2%
20.5% ***
67.4%
7.5% ***
72.8%
16.8% ***
71.1%
10.1% ***
69.5%
5.5%
69.3%
4.9% ***
70.5%
11.8% ***
48.4%
11.7% ***
74.4%
-2.6%
61.8%
7.8% ***
67.7%
5.8% ***
75.4%
5.8% *
69.1%
7.9% ***
59.9%
8.0%
69.6%
8.7% ***
139-400% FPG
Percent Point
2008
2012
Change
%
%
17.1%
23.1%
6.0% ***
12.4%
16.2%
3.8%
17.0%
15.2%
-1.8%
27.6%
28.7%
1.2%
23.1%
25.0%
1.9% ***
12.3%
18.8%
6.6% ***
18.4%
29.1%
10.7% ***
14.8%
23.6%
8.8% ***
35.8%
41.3%
5.5%
17.6%
24.9%
7.3% ***
22.2%
22.9%
0.7%
11.0%
16.7%
5.7% ***
12.1%
14.6%
2.5%
21.0%
26.5%
5.4% ***
11.8%
14.6%
2.8% ***
12.6%
17.7%
5.2% ***
12.4%
16.6%
4.2% ***
16.0%
15.2%
-0.7%
31.6%
32.4%
0.8%
18.9%
25.3%
6.4% **
21.8%
26.8%
5.0% ***
18.1%
23.7%
5.5% ***
15.3%
18.7%
3.4% ***
10.3%
12.5%
2.3% **
22.6%
25.7%
3.1% *
13.9%
16.4%
2.5% **
8.8%
26.0%
17.2% ***
9.3%
12.9%
3.6% **
5.8%
10.0%
4.2% ***
22.7%
25.6%
2.8%
17.0%
24.4%
7.4% ***
28.8%
32.2%
3.4%
21.1%
25.0%
3.8% ***
19.6%
21.5%
2.0% **
5.4%
12.2%
6.8% **
11.1%
14.2%
3.1% ***
18.5%
23.4%
4.9% ***
9.9%
19.8%
9.9% ***
16.5%
20.5%
4.0% ***
15.8%
15.6%
-0.2%
15.2%
20.8%
5.6% ***
11.5%
17.1%
5.6% *
14.7%
17.6%
3.0% ***
18.4%
23.2%
4.7% ***
7.7%
6.3%
-1.4%
31.4%
40.1%
8.7% *
10.7%
15.6%
4.9% ***
19.1%
25.3%
6.2% ***
17.6%
19.1%
1.5%
13.2%
15.4%
2.2% *
15.2%
14.6%
-0.6%
17.6%
21.3%
3.8% ***
401%+ FPG
Percent Point
2008
2012
Change
%
%
2.5%
2.8%
0.4%
2.3%
3.1%
2.6%
1.6%
1.6%
1.5%
3.8%
2.8%
2.1%
2.0%
-0.8%
0.7%
0.2%
0.6%
0.4%
2.9%
3.3%
3.5%
2.2%
0.6%
-1.1% ***
2.3%
1.2%
1.6%
1.5%
1.4%
4.4%
2.7%
1.4%
2.8%
0.4%
0.2%
1.3% *
2.4%
5.4%
1.1% *
1.0%
1.6%
1.7%
1.9%
0.9%
3.2%
1.6%
2.2%
1.9%
2.7%
1.0%
6.8%
1.7%
0.6%
0.2%
0.8%
0.1%
3.6% ***
0.1%
2.3%
1.2%
5.1%
2.3%
2.3%
2.0%
5.7%
3.2%
3.0%
0.8% ***
0.6%
0.9% ***
0.7%
1.5%
3.0%
-0.1%
0.7%
1.9%
1.4%
3.6%
1.7%
2.0%
2.1%
2.9%
0.8%
1.9%
2.5%
1.0%
2.2%
2.3%
1.7%
0.3%
-0.2%
0.7%
1.0%
1.8%
0.7% **
0.4%
1.5%
1.6%
2.2%
3.7%
1.8%
2.1%
2.4%
0.3% ***
0.2%
0.3%
Notes: Significant difference between periods is indicated by confidence levels of: *= 90%, **= 95%, ***= 99%. Estimates reflect the primary source of coverage. FPG = Federal Poverty
Notes:
Significant
difference
between
periods
is indicated
confidence
levelsis of:
*=on90%,
**= 95%,
Estimates
reflect
primary
Guidelines
established by
the U.S. Department
of Health
and Human
Services. by
Analysis
by family income
based
the income
of the ***=
health 99%.
insurance
unit. Estimates
with the
relative
standard
source
ofgreater
coverage.
FPG
Federal Poverty Guidelines established by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Analysis by family
errors that
than 30%
are=excluded.
income
is based
the income
the health
insurance
unit. Estimates with relative standard errors greater than 30% are excluded.
Source: 2008
& 2012 on
American
CommunityofSurveys
as analyzed
by SHADAC.
Source: 2008 & 2012 American Community Surveys as analyzed by SHADAC.
16
APPENDIX TABLE 4:
TREND IN THE PERCENT OF CHILDREN UNINSURED BY INCOME CATEGORY
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
United States
2008
%
13.3%
19.4%
22.9%
10.2%
16.4%
27.2%
8.8%
13.6%
0-138% FPG
Percent Point
2012
Change
%
6.7%
-6.6% ***
16.9%
-2.5%
15.5%
-7.4% ***
5.6%
-4.6% ***
11.6%
-4.8% ***
12.2%
-15.0% ***
6.7%
-2.1%
5.2%
-8.4% **
26.9%
18.2%
4.5%
17.0%
9.4%
14.3%
9.2%
14.4%
8.5%
10.0%
4.1%
11.2%
3.4%
8.4%
12.3%
16.3%
9.6%
22.8%
16.0%
34.7%
7.2%
13.4%
18.7%
8.2%
14.8%
17.6%
11.3%
14.1%
20.2%
11.3%
8.3%
16.7%
10.5%
9.7%
23.7%
25.8%
14.3%
13.5%
5.1%
10.9%
4.8%
10.8%
6.7%
11.3%
8.7%
6.8%
4.0%
7.0%
2.0%
6.8%
10.8%
9.0%
11.1%
15.9%
10.9%
26.6%
6.8%
9.5%
11.9%
6.0%
9.6%
10.3%
7.6%
13.1%
6.4%
8.0%
9.8%
11.1%
5.6%
8.2%
14.7%
18.4%
-12.6% ***
-4.6% ***
0.6%
-6.0% ***
-4.6% ***
-3.6% ***
-2.5%
-3.1%
0.3%
-3.2% ***
-0.1%
-4.2% ***
-1.5% *
-1.7% **
-1.5%
-7.3% ***
1.5%
-6.9% **
-5.1% *
-8.1% ***
-0.4%
-3.9% ***
-6.8% ***
-2.2% ***
-5.2% ***
-7.3%
-3.6% ***
-1.0%
-13.8% ***
-3.3% ***
1.5%
-5.6% ***
-4.9% *
-1.5%
-9.1% ***
-7.5% ***
14.7%
13.3%
9.4%
9.5%
17.2%
15.5%
9.5%
8.4%
4.8%
9.4%
10.6%
10.4%
-5.2% ***
-4.9% ***
-4.6% ***
-0.2%
-6.6%
-5.1% ***
139-400% FPG
Percent Point
2008
2012
Change
%
%
7.1%
3.7%
-3.4% ***
12.4%
13.7%
1.3%
17.0%
15.3%
-1.6%
9.6%
7.1%
-2.5% **
11.9%
9.4%
-2.5% ***
13.7%
11.2%
-2.5% **
9.1%
5.1%
-4.0% ***
10.3%
4.0%
-6.2% ***
18.3%
11.1%
2.7%
13.6%
6.0%
10.5%
4.6%
8.5%
6.2%
8.5%
7.9%
6.9%
2.3%
5.2%
7.1%
12.7%
8.4%
15.5%
6.9%
20.4%
8.2%
9.9%
12.3%
6.4%
11.1%
7.4%
14.6%
13.2%
6.1%
8.0%
11.9%
11.7%
7.7%
19.1%
11.5%
6.0%
8.9%
9.7%
7.0%
5.1%
10.9%
10.6%
12.5%
9.1%
3.0%
7.7%
4.4%
9.0%
5.1%
6.9%
6.2%
5.5%
6.1%
4.9%
1.6%
4.2%
7.0%
7.5%
7.3%
12.9%
5.8%
13.8%
6.6%
7.0%
7.4%
4.9%
8.6%
8.8%
6.4%
11.4%
8.0%
5.7%
4.6%
8.1%
4.6%
5.9%
15.9%
7.8%
-5.8% ***
-2.0% ***
0.3%
-6.0% ***
-1.7% ***
-1.4%
0.5%
-1.6%
0.0%
-3.0% ***
-1.8%
-1.9% ***
-0.7%
-1.0% *
-0.1%
-5.2% ***
-1.1%
-2.6%
-1.1%
-6.6% ***
-1.6%
-2.9% ***
-4.9% ***
-1.5% ***
-2.5% ***
-1.0% *
-3.2% ***
-5.2% ***
-0.4%
-3.3% *
-3.8% ***
-7.1% ***
-1.8% ***
-3.2% ***
-3.7% ***
7.3%
6.8%
5.4%
4.2%
11.6%
8.3%
-1.6% **
-2.9% ***
-1.6%
-0.9%
0.6%
-2.3% ***
401%+ FPG
Percent Point
2008
2012
Change
%
%
2.6%
1.1%
-1.5% ***
4.3%
3.3%
4.5%
1.2%
4.3%
3.4%
-0.9%
3.0%
2.3%
-0.7% ***
2.6%
2.6%
0.0%
0.8%
1.3%
0.5% *
5.4%
3.7%
3.5%
2.4%
-1.9% ***
-1.4% ***
1.3%
2.2%
1.9%
3.0%
2.1%
3.9%
-1.0% ***
-0.6%
1.9%
0.6%
2.2%
1.7%
5.3%
2.2%
5.4%
1.1%
6.5%
1.5%
0.7%
1.7%
0.9%
2.5%
2.4%
-0.4%
0.1%
-0.5%
-0.8% *
-2.8% ***
0.2%
4.2%
-2.3% *
2.3%
5.1%
2.3%
3.1%
1.5%
-0.8% ***
1.5%
2.4%
-0.8% ***
-0.7%
2.0%
3.7%
2.8%
2.2%
1.8%
4.6%
1.5%
1.5%
-0.2%
0.8%
-1.3% **
-0.7% *
4.0%
3.4%
-0.7%
2.4%
5.2%
3.2%
1.8%
5.1%
3.3%
-0.6%
-0.1%
0.1%
2.0%
2.6%
1.9%
2.2%
-0.1%
-0.4%
1.2%
1.4%
0.1%
2.9%
2.3%
-0.5% ***
4.0%
2.3%
2.8%
2.2%
2.3%
3.6%
0.8%
-0.2%
0.4%
Notes: Significant difference between periods is indicated by confidence levels of: *= 90%, **= 95%, ***= 99%. FPG = Federal Poverty Guidelines established by
the U.S.Significant
Departement ofdifference
Health and Human
Services.
Analysisisbyindicated
family incomebyis confidence
based on the income
of of:
the health
insurance
unit. Estimates
with relative
standardreflect the primary
Notes:
between
periods
levels
*= 90%,
**= 95%,
***= 99%.
Estimates
errors greater
than 30% are
excluded.
source
of coverage.
FPG
= Federal Poverty Guidelines established by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Analysis by family
Source: 2008
& 2012 on
American
CommunityofSurveys
as analyzed
by SHADAC.
income
is based
the income
the health
insurance
unit. Estimates with relative standard errors greater than 30% are excluded.
Source: 2008 & 2012 American Community Surveys as analyzed by SHADAC.
APPENDIX TABLE 5:
TREND IN PERCENT OF CHILDREN WITH PRIVATE COVERAGE BY RACE/ETHNICITY
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
United States
2008
%
73.2%
80.5%
76.9%
60.7%
81.7%
81.9%
86.4%
83.1%
93.7%
70.7%
72.4%
87.3%
71.7%
81.5%
73.3%
78.5%
79.8%
65.5%
66.9%
65.5%
84.9%
86.8%
75.9%
85.4%
65.4%
71.9%
72.9%
83.7%
78.9%
77.6%
87.2%
70.0%
80.3%
73.8%
85.1%
76.3%
65.3%
75.3%
78.1%
86.2%
73.5%
78.6%
71.6%
77.7%
82.0%
65.8%
83.9%
76.4%
61.7%
82.4%
75.3%
77.2%
White
Percent Point
2012
Change
%
70.2%
-3.0% **
77.8%
-2.7%
72.0%
-4.8% ***
55.1%
-5.6% ***
77.9%
-3.7% ***
78.5%
-3.5% ***
82.7%
-3.7% ***
75.8%
-7.4% **
99.7%
6.0% *
66.4%
-4.4% ***
69.8%
-2.6% ***
83.3%
-4.0%
67.6%
-4.2% **
77.1%
-4.4% ***
69.8%
-3.5% ***
73.6%
-4.9% ***
74.1%
-5.7% ***
62.5%
-3.0% ***
63.7%
-3.2% **
60.3%
-5.3% **
81.9%
-3.1% ***
83.3%
-3.5% ***
69.7%
-6.2% ***
83.2%
-2.3% ***
62.0%
-3.3% *
68.2%
-3.6% ***
59.1%
-13.8% ***
79.6%
-4.1% ***
73.4%
-5.5% ***
71.2%
-6.4% ***
84.8%
-2.4% ***
70.7%
0.6%
76.4%
-3.9% ***
69.9%
-3.9% ***
85.4%
0.2%
70.7%
-5.6% ***
65.1%
-0.3%
68.6%
-6.7% ***
73.9%
-4.2% ***
80.4%
-5.8% ***
67.6%
-5.9% ***
79.7%
1.2%
67.5%
-4.1% ***
74.2%
-3.5% ***
80.7%
-1.4%
60.2%
-5.6% *
80.7%
-3.2% ***
72.6%
-3.8% ***
61.6%
-0.1%
78.2%
-4.2% ***
70.9%
-4.4%
73.2%
-4.0% ***
2008
%
47.8%
47.3%
49.1%
32.7%
68.2%
68.1%
63.6%
54.6%
46.1%
48.0%
49.2%
79.8%
58.1%
51.4%
48.5%
50.6%
56.0%
48.4%
35.3%
57.0%
66.7%
65.6%
49.7%
56.0%
33.9%
49.2%
31.2%
55.3%
70.9%
73.8%
64.5%
33.6%
56.2%
48.2%
46.3%
49.2%
45.1%
69.0%
54.1%
64.1%
47.0%
24.3%
51.1%
54.9%
66.7%
54.1%
63.7%
64.5%
47.1%
49.1%
48.0%
54.5%
Non-White
Percent Point
2012
Change
%
38.4%
-9.4% ***
38.5%
-8.8% *
47.6%
-1.5%
36.3%
3.6%
65.1%
-3.1% ***
55.4%
-12.7% ***
56.8%
-6.9% **
57.3%
2.7%
43.2%
-2.9%
39.9%
-8.1% ***
45.3%
-3.9% ***
68.1%
-11.8% ***
62.1%
4.0%
44.8%
-6.7% ***
40.5%
-8.0% ***
47.8%
-2.8%
53.0%
-3.0%
44.9%
-3.5%
30.8%
-4.5% ***
35.9%
-21.1% ***
60.0%
-6.7% ***
60.1%
-5.4% ***
43.1%
-6.6% ***
46.3%
-9.7% ***
28.5%
-5.4% ***
42.9%
-6.3% ***
25.4%
-5.8%
46.0%
-9.2% *
61.3%
-9.6% ***
65.0%
-8.9%
63.4%
-1.1%
33.4%
-0.2%
51.2%
-4.9% ***
44.2%
-3.9% ***
43.8%
-2.5%
41.4%
-7.7% ***
40.3%
-4.7% **
61.7%
-7.3% ***
47.1%
-7.0% ***
58.0%
-6.1%
37.7%
-9.3% ***
25.4%
1.1%
45.4%
-5.7% ***
52.0%
-3.0% ***
65.4%
-1.3%
36.6%
-17.5%
60.1%
-3.6% ***
62.8%
-1.8%
44.3%
-2.9%
42.7%
-6.4% **
47.0%
-1.0%
49.4%
-5.1% ***
2008
%
32.5%
53.9%
38.2%
25.2%
43.2%
42.1%
45.9%
44.1%
53.0%
45.4%
32.4%
68.6%
34.3%
45.9%
43.3%
56.3%
46.5%
45.7%
44.9%
62.2%
46.8%
42.6%
46.4%
48.7%
40.8%
47.3%
49.6%
45.3%
51.5%
69.9%
50.6%
39.6%
45.0%
26.6%
49.1%
35.1%
41.3%
42.6%
44.2%
34.9%
44.8%
31.7%
33.7%
46.1%
58.1%
39.6%
53.2%
52.9%
59.1%
41.5%
Hispanic
Percent Point
2012
Change
%
27.7%
-4.8%
56.0%
2.1%
35.7%
-2.5%
29.4%
4.2%
38.8%
-4.5% ***
37.9%
-4.2% **
35.8%
-10.1% ***
35.1%
-9.0%
39.7%
-13.3%
36.4%
-9.0% ***
29.3%
-3.0%
56.6%
-11.9% **
36.9%
2.6%
38.1%
-7.8% ***
37.1%
-6.1% *
48.3%
-8.0%
35.4%
-11.2% ***
35.9%
-9.7% *
38.5%
-6.4%
65.5%
3.3%
42.2%
-4.6%
35.6%
-7.0% ***
41.2%
-5.2% *
42.4%
-6.3%
33.2%
-7.6%
34.8%
-12.5% ***
45.7%
-3.9%
39.5%
-5.8%
45.1%
-6.4% ***
50.2%
-19.6% *
41.3%
-9.3% ***
39.0%
-0.6%
41.2%
-3.8% ***
22.7%
-3.9% **
50.6%
43.7%
-5.5% *
25.3%
-9.8% ***
34.5%
-6.8% **
34.0%
-8.6% ***
30.9%
-13.3% ***
35.1%
0.2%
40.4%
-4.3%
30.5%
-1.2%
31.4%
-2.4% ***
41.6%
-4.5%
44.8%
57.0%
-1.1%
35.7%
-3.9%
58.7%
5.6%
40.1%
-12.9% ***
49.9%
-9.2%
36.7%
-4.8% ***
Notes: Significant difference between periods is indicated by confidence levels of: *= 90%, **= 95%, ***= 99%. Estimates reflect the primary source of coverage. Estimates with relative
Notes:
standardSignificant
errors greater difference
than 30% are between
excluded. periods is indicated by confidence levels of: *= 90%, **= 95%, ***= 99%. Estimates reflect the primary
source of coverage. Estimates with relative standard errors greater than 30% are excluded.
Source: 2008 & 2012 American Community Surveys as analyzed by SHADAC.
Source: 2008 & 2012 American Community Surveys as analyzed by SHADAC.
18
APPENDIX TABLE 6:
TREND IN PERCENT OF CHILDREN WITH PUBLIC COVERAGE BY RACE/ETHNICITY
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
United States
2008
%
20.0%
12.3%
14.0%
31.7%
12.7%
10.2%
9.7%
11.4%
16.4%
19.7%
8.3%
19.1%
14.9%
17.6%
17.4%
14.0%
28.9%
26.7%
29.0%
11.3%
11.6%
19.5%
9.9%
23.6%
21.7%
14.8%
11.6%
7.7%
17.3%
8.8%
25.0%
15.7%
18.7%
10.8%
17.2%
24.5%
14.1%
16.5%
10.8%
17.6%
15.7%
23.0%
12.4%
10.1%
31.0%
10.6%
17.6%
31.7%
13.5%
16.1%
16.3%
White
Percent Point
2012
Change
%
26.6%
6.6% ***
13.3%
1.0%
19.4%
5.4% ***
39.2%
7.5% ***
16.5%
3.9% ***
16.1%
6.0% ***
14.6%
4.9% ***
21.5%
10.1% ***
25.0%
23.3%
15.3%
25.9%
20.1%
22.7%
22.3%
19.6%
31.7%
31.6%
35.1%
15.4%
15.4%
26.1%
12.5%
31.2%
24.7%
30.9%
17.2%
15.4%
24.4%
12.0%
23.5%
20.2%
24.3%
9.9%
23.9%
28.4%
26.2%
21.1%
14.8%
24.2%
17.5%
27.5%
17.4%
13.3%
36.9%
14.7%
23.1%
33.8%
18.1%
20.1%
21.5%
8.6% ***
3.6% ***
7.0% **
6.8% ***
5.2% ***
5.0% ***
4.9% ***
5.6% ***
2.8% ***
4.8% ***
6.1% ***
4.1% ***
3.9% ***
6.6% ***
2.5% ***
7.5% ***
3.0% ***
16.1% ***
5.6% ***
7.7% ***
7.1% ***
3.2% ***
-1.5%
4.5% ***
5.6% ***
-0.9%
6.7% ***
3.9% ***
12.1% ***
4.6% ***
4.0% **
6.7% ***
1.8%
4.5% ***
5.0% ***
3.2% ***
5.9% *
4.0% ***
5.5% ***
2.1%
4.6% ***
4.0%
5.2% ***
2008
%
43.6%
32.5%
32.8%
59.4%
24.4%
21.4%
30.6%
35.6%
51.2%
33.8%
39.9%
17.4%
24.9%
41.5%
41.7%
41.0%
35.7%
45.5%
55.8%
37.1%
27.5%
32.1%
43.9%
37.4%
52.2%
43.5%
36.2%
35.5%
15.5%
17.8%
26.8%
41.1%
37.1%
42.7%
25.0%
43.4%
40.2%
20.2%
39.2%
27.8%
40.5%
54.5%
41.8%
31.1%
17.4%
33.0%
28.2%
26.3%
49.2%
46.2%
30.3%
35.9%
Non-White
Percent Point
2012
Change
%
56.7%
13.1% ***
40.6%
8.2% *
38.7%
5.8% ***
58.5%
-0.9%
28.8%
4.4% ***
35.0%
13.6% ***
37.4%
6.8% **
39.0%
3.5%
53.5%
2.4%
48.0%
14.2% ***
46.1%
6.3% ***
28.1%
10.7% ***
28.5%
3.7%
50.5%
9.0% ***
52.6%
10.8% ***
48.2%
7.2%
38.9%
3.2%
48.1%
2.5%
63.0%
7.3% ***
56.9%
19.8% ***
35.9%
8.4% ***
38.1%
6.0% ***
52.1%
8.2% ***
47.7%
10.3% ***
63.1%
10.9% ***
50.1%
6.6% ***
52.0%
15.8% ***
45.2%
9.7%
25.9%
10.4% ***
31.1%
13.3% **
30.5%
3.7% ***
51.6%
10.5% ***
43.7%
6.5% ***
49.2%
6.4% ***
37.1%
12.2%
52.7%
9.3% ***
44.6%
4.4% *
32.6%
12.4% ***
48.5%
9.3% ***
37.2%
9.4% *
55.9%
15.4% ***
65.7%
11.2%
48.9%
7.2% ***
38.9%
7.8% ***
21.3%
3.9%
59.6%
26.6% **
33.2%
5.1% ***
30.1%
3.9% **
51.8%
2.7%
52.3%
6.0% *
45.9%
15.6%
43.5%
7.6% ***
2008
%
44.9%
32.3%
40.3%
56.0%
41.7%
31.7%
45.1%
33.3%
38.3%
29.2%
38.5%
28.9%
35.8%
44.5%
42.0%
35.8%
35.5%
38.1%
38.6%
34.2%
39.1%
55.4%
45.2%
30.9%
28.4%
34.3%
38.7%
34.1%
15.8%
24.8%
35.7%
46.1%
46.7%
47.3%
52.5%
38.5%
46.8%
38.8%
46.1%
43.8%
36.1%
40.5%
41.6%
19.9%
22.0%
44.8%
33.9%
33.7%
40.1%
Hispanic
Percent Point
2012
Change
%
60.3%
15.4% ***
39.0%
6.7%
46.9%
6.6% ***
62.1%
6.1%
50.3%
8.6% ***
47.0%
15.2% ***
58.6%
13.5% ***
58.0%
24.7% ***
56.7%
18.4% *
48.7%
19.6% ***
50.2%
11.7% ***
41.1%
12.2% **
49.1%
13.4% ***
57.6%
13.0% ***
47.6%
5.7%
42.1%
6.3%
53.7%
18.2% ***
49.8%
11.7% *
49.5%
10.9% **
31.2%
-3.0%
48.1%
9.0% ***
62.8%
7.5% ***
52.5%
7.3% ***
39.4%
8.5% *
55.2%
26.8% ***
47.5%
13.2% ***
49.5%
10.9%
44.9%
10.7% **
30.1%
14.4% ***
45.7%
20.9% **
49.5%
13.8% ***
52.9%
6.8% ***
53.6%
6.8% ***
60.8%
13.5% ***
28.4%
-24.1%
47.7%
9.2% ***
57.7%
10.9% ***
57.0%
18.1% ***
58.5%
12.3% ***
59.9%
16.0% ***
45.8%
9.8% **
54.0%
54.7%
14.2% ***
51.2%
9.6% ***
33.4%
13.5% ***
50.0%
32.8%
10.9% ***
54.9%
10.1% ***
37.9%
47.0%
13.1% ***
31.1%
-2.6%
50.7%
10.5% ***
Notes: Significant difference between periods is indicated by confidence levels of: *= 90%, **= 95%, ***= 99%. Estimates reflect the primary source of coverage. Estimates with relative
standardSignificant
errors greater difference
than 30% are between
excluded. periods is indicated by confidence levels of: *= 90%, **= 95%, ***= 99%. Estimates reflect the primary
Notes:
Source: 2008
& 2012 American
Community
Surveys
as analyzed
by SHADAC.
source
of coverage.
Estimates
with
relative
standard
errors greater than 30% are excluded.
Source: 2008 & 2012 American Community Surveys as analyzed by SHADAC.
APPENDIX TABLE 7:
TREND IN THE PERCENT OF CHILDREN UNINSURED BY RACE/ETHNICITY
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
United States
2008
%
6.8%
7.2%
9.2%
7.6%
5.7%
7.9%
3.9%
5.5%
White
Percent Point
2012
Change
%
3.3%
-3.6% ***
8.9%
1.7%
8.6%
-0.6%
5.7%
-2.0% **
5.5%
-0.2%
5.4%
-2.5% ***
2.7%
-1.2% *
12.9%
7.9%
8.7%
6.9%
-4.3% ***
-1.0% *
9.2%
3.6%
9.0%
4.2%
6.3%
5.6%
6.4%
5.5%
3.7%
1.6%
4.6%
4.6%
11.0%
6.4%
12.3%
4.7%
13.4%
5.1%
4.1%
4.9%
4.0%
7.5%
4.0%
6.6%
10.2%
10.6%
5.5%
3.1%
8.9%
5.7%
5.4%
9.9%
7.9%
3.2%
5.4%
6.0%
6.6%
4.0%
8.6%
6.5%
6.6%
2.8%
7.5%
4.1%
6.3%
5.8%
4.7%
4.7%
2.7%
1.2%
4.2%
4.4%
6.8%
7.1%
10.0%
3.2%
11.2%
4.4%
3.2%
5.8%
3.4%
5.8%
4.7%
5.5%
6.5%
5.2%
5.1%
4.8%
8.2%
-2.6% **
-0.8% **
-1.5% **
0.0%
0.1%
0.2%
-1.7% **
-0.8%
-1.0% **
-0.4%
-0.4%
-0.2%
-4.2% ***
0.7%
-2.3%
-1.5% **
-2.2%
-0.7%
-0.9% **
0.9%
-0.6% **
-1.7% ***
0.7%
-1.1% ***
-3.7% ***
-5.4% ***
-0.4%
1.8% *
-0.7%
5.0%
8.4%
6.0%
2.9%
4.6%
4.3%
4.6%
3.7%
9.0%
5.4%
-0.4%
-1.6% ***
-1.9% **
-0.4%
-0.8%
-1.7% ***
-2.0% **
-0.3%
0.4%
-1.2% ***
2008
%
8.6%
20.2%
18.0%
8.0%
7.4%
10.5%
5.8%
9.8%
18.2%
11.0%
2.8%
17.0%
7.1%
9.8%
8.2%
6.1%
8.9%
5.9%
5.8%
2.3%
6.5%
6.6%
13.9%
7.3%
32.6%
9.2%
13.7%
Non-White
Percent Point
2012
Change
%
4.9%
-3.7% ***
20.9%
0.7%
13.7%
-4.4% ***
5.3%
-2.7% **
6.1%
-1.4% ***
9.6%
-0.8%
5.8%
0.0%
3.7%
-6.1%
3.3%
12.1%
-6.1% ***
8.6%
-2.4% ***
3.9%
1.1%
9.4%
-7.6% *
4.8%
-2.4% ***
6.9%
-2.9% ***
2008
%
22.6%
21.5%
18.9%
15.1%
26.2%
9.0%
22.6%
Hispanic
Percent Point
2012
Change
%
12.0%
-10.7% ***
5.0%
17.4%
-4.1% ***
8.5%
-10.4% ***
10.9%
-4.1% ***
15.2%
-11.0% ***
5.5%
-3.4% **
25.5%
29.1%
14.9%
20.5%
-10.5% ***
-8.6% ***
30.0%
9.6%
14.8%
7.9%
18.0%
16.2%
16.5%
14.0%
4.3%
15.2%
9.5%
10.9%
14.3%
12.0%
-16.0% ***
-5.3% ***
0.5%
1.7%
-7.0% ***
-2.0%
-4.5%
8.0%
7.0%
6.2%
-0.2%
0.9%
-2.8% ***
4.1%
1.8%
4.8%
6.0%
8.4%
7.0%
22.6%
8.8%
12.9%
-1.7% ***
-0.6%
-1.7% ***
-0.7%
-5.5% ***
-0.3%
-10.0% *
-0.4%
-0.8%
14.1%
2.1%
8.4%
20.4%
30.8%
18.4%
9.7%
-4.4% **
6.3%
18.2%
11.6%
17.7%
-2.1%
-2.3%
-19.2% ***
-0.7%
20.6%
32.7%
15.7%
24.8%
-4.9%
-7.9% ***
-2.6% ***
-10.3% ***
-1.6% ***
-2.5% ***
-9.6%
-1.5% *
0.3%
-5.1% ***
-2.3% ***
13.7%
14.3%
8.3%
26.2%
9.2%
8.2%
5.2%
16.5%
-4.5% ***
-6.2% ***
-3.0% ***
-9.6% ***
12.5%
21.3%
7.1%
13.9%
15.9%
6.1%
15.0%
5.1%
6.6%
19.1%
5.9%
15.1%
5.7%
4.5%
4.8%
6.4%
9.0%
5.7%
9.1%
13.3%
12.4%
18.1%
19.9%
11.3%
12.0%
29.0%
8.6%
17.0%
8.5%
7.6%
9.2%
19.1%
-3.8% **
-1.1%
-11.4% ***
-3.7% **
-2.8%
-9.9% **
27.8%
24.7%
34.0%
14.8%
17.5%
25.0%
-13.0% ***
-7.2% ***
-8.9% ***
8.2%
9.2%
6.6%
7.1%
-1.5% *
-2.1% *
19.9%
15.6%
10.2%
9.4%
-9.8% ***
-6.2% ***
4.6%
21.8%
9.6%
5.0%
7.1%
7.1%
0.4%
-14.7% **
-2.5% ***
13.2%
13.0%
19.1%
12.6%
-0.2%
8.7%
25.3%
6.7%
9.1%
28.7%
7.5%
14.7%
10.8%
6.7%
-6.1% ***
-12.3% **
-1.5%
-4.8% ***
-2.6%
18.3%
-5.7% ***
Notes: Significant difference between periods is indicated by confidence levels of: *= 90%, **= 95%, ***= 99%. Estimates with relative standard errors greater than 30% are excluded.
Notes: Significant difference between periods is indicated by confidence levels of: *= 90%, **= 95%, ***= 99%. Estimates with relative
Source: 2008errors
& 2012greater
Americanthan
Community
as analyzed by SHADAC.
standard
30% Surveys
are excluded.
Source: 2008 & 2012 American Community Surveys as analyzed by SHADAC.
20
United States
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
10%
8%
9%
26%
29%
33%
60%
62%
Private Coverage
7%
8%
31%
64%
2012
2011
2010
Public Coverage
34%
59%
59%
Uninsured
5.6
5.4
1.5
5.5
4.9
5.0
4.5
1.4
3.0
1.4
2.0
1.3
1.0
1.3
0.0
1.2
2009
2010
2011
2.9
1.5
2012
2.8
2.8
1.5
4.0
2008
1.4
2.7
2.7
1.4
2.6
2.6
1.3
1.3
2.5
2.4
2.4
2.3
2.3
2.2
2.1
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If the
relative
an estimate
30% then
it is notSeeincluded
in for
themore
graphs.
Note:
If the
relative
standardstandard
error of an error
estimateofexceeds
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
in the graphs.
tables below
detail.
www.shadac.org
Alabama
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
8%
2010
6%
6%
29%
34%
36%
60%
63%
2012
6%
4%
37%
57%
Private Coverage
2011
Public Coverage
39%
57%
57%
Uninsured
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
1.5
1.6
1.4
7.0
6.2
5.2
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.2
4.0
2010
2011
0.4
2.0
0.2
1.0
3.7
2.9
0.0
0.0
2008
2012
3.3
3.0
0.6
2009
6.1
5.1
5.0
0.8
2008
7.0
6.0
1.2
1.0
N/A
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:IfIfthe
the relative
relative standard
error oferror
an estimate
30%exceeds
then it is not
included
See tablesinbelow
more detail.
Note:
standard
of an exceeds
estimate
30%
theninitthe
is graphs.
not included
the for
graphs.
22
www.shadac.org
Alaska
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
13%
10%
14%
21%
2011
2010
63%
66%
27%
64%
Private Coverage
13%
14%
26%
24%
2012
Public Coverage
26%
60%
61%
Uninsured
3.5
4.5
3.0
2.8
2.3
2.2
2.0
2008
2009
2010
N/A
2011
2012
0.4
0.2
1.0
N/A
0.5
0.3
1.5
1.7
0.6
0.6
3.0
2.8
2.5
2.6
0.5
0.1
0.0
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If the
relative
standardstandard
error of an error
estimateofexceeds
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
in the it
graphs.
tables below
detail.
Note:
If the
relative
an estimate
30% then
is notSee
included
in for
themore
graphs.
www.shadac.org
Arizona
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
13%
13%
16%
56%
28%
55%
32%
13%
13%
54%
33%
Private Coverage
2012
2011
2010
53%
34%
Public Coverage
53%
34%
Uninsured
2.5
7.0
7.0
2.0
6.0
5.0
4.7
4.2
4.6
2.4
2.0
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
2.0
0.0
2009
2010
2011
2012
2.0
1.9
1.8
0.0
2008
2.1
2.1
2.0
0.5
1.0
2.3
2.2
2.1
1.0
3.0
2.4
2.3
1.8
3.4
4.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
24
www.shadac.org
Arkansas
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
9%
7%
7%
51%
41%
48%
46%
45%
Private Coverage
6%
6%
47%
50%
43%
2012
2011
2010
Public Coverage
48%
46%
Uninsured
3.2
3.0
1.2
2.4
2.5
1.3
1.4
3.0
1.6
1.0
0.9
0.8
1.5
0.6
1.0
0.4
0.5
2008
2009
2010
2011
0.7
2.7
2.2
1.9
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
2012
2.5
2.5
1.5
0.2
N/A
0.0
3.0
1.1
1.0
2.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
www.shadac.org
California
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
11%
10%
10%
29%
60%
32%
9%
34%
58%
8%
36%
56%
Private Coverage
2012
2011
2010
Public Coverage
37%
55%
55%
Uninsured
1.4
5.8
5.8
1.3
1.3
3.0
1.3
1.2
5.5
5.6
1.1
1.1
1.0
5.4
5.4
5.0
5.0
5.0
0.4
4.6
0.2
2008
2009
2010
2011
2.2
2.0
0.5
0.0
2008
2012
2.5
1.0
0.0
4.4
2.6
1.5
0.6
4.8
2.7
2.5
2.0
0.8
5.2
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
26
www.shadac.org
Colorado
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
10%
10%
13%
22%
18%
2011
2010
9%
10%
24%
25%
28%
Private Coverage
63%
65%
66%
67%
69%
2012
Public Coverage
Uninsured
10.6
10.0
10.2
8.3
7.8
8.0
6.0
4.7
4.0
2.0
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.7
1.8
3.0
1.4
1.3
3.3
3.5
3.0
2.9
2.8
2.5
2.5
2.0
0.9
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
www.shadac.org
Connecticut
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
5%
4%
3%
3%
4%
20%
23%
25%
27%
Private Coverage
68%
70%
71%
73%
75%
28%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
3.5
11.7
2.5
8.0
2.0
6.3
6.0
5.2
5.0
4.9
1.5
4.0
3.0
3.0
10.0
2.2
2.1
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
2012
2.1
1.5
0.5
2011
2.1
2.0
1.4
2.0
2010
2.3
2.5
1.0
2009
2.7
3.0
4.0
2008
3.6
3.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
28
www.shadac.org
Delaware
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
2010
5%
6%
9%
22%
29%
2012
4%
4%
33%
34%
32%
63%
66%
69%
2011
Private Coverage
63%
Public Coverage
64%
Uninsured
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.8
2008
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2009
2010
2011
2012
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
4.1
2.4
2.3
N/A
2008
2009
2010
N/A
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
99%
98%
97%
96%
95%
94%
93%
92%
91%
90%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
www.shadac.org
District of Columbia
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
3%
3%
2%
4%
3%
40%
57%
43%
43%
53%
42%
55%
Private Coverage
Public Coverage
43%
54%
54%
Uninsured
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
30
www.shadac.org
Florida
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
59%
24%
55%
30%
53%
33%
Private Coverage
11%
13%
14%
15%
17%
2012
2011
2010
51%
36%
Public Coverage
51%
38%
Uninsured
1.5
6.1
6.0
1.4
1.4
1.4
5.0
5.0
4.3
4.1
4.0
3.4
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.0
1.2
1.2
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.8
1.8
2009
2010
1.6
1.7
1.0
0.5
0.0
1.1
2008
2.0
1.5
1.3
2.0
2.5
2.0
1.4
3.0
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
www.shadac.org
Georgia
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
11%
10%
11%
30%
31%
59%
34%
56%
Private Coverage
9%
10%
34%
58%
2012
2011
2010
Public Coverage
54%
36%
56%
Uninsured
1.6
8.2
1.4
6.7
5.7
5.7
4.9
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
3.7
2008
2012
4.0
3.7
2009
2010
2.8
3.0
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
32
www.shadac.org
Hawaii
Sources of Insurance Coverage
17%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
3%
3%
4%
4%
3%
22%
22%
24%
72%
75%
80%
28%
Private Coverage
68%
74%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
0.8
0.6
N/A
2008
2009
2010
N/A
N/A
2011
2012
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
98%
97%
96%
95%
94%
2009
2012
2010
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
99%
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
www.shadac.org
Idaho
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
13%
30%
63%
63%
65%
8%
27%
26%
25%
2012
9%
11%
11%
22%
2011
2010
Private Coverage
62%
64%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
3.6
N/A
2008
2009
2010
N/A
N/A
2011
2012
1.9
3.3
3.5
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.1
3.0
2.5
2.2
2.0
1.6
1.9
2.1
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
34
www.shadac.org
Illinois
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
6%
2010
5%
5%
28%
33%
2012
4%
4%
36%
36%
34%
Private Coverage
60%
60%
61%
62%
67%
2011
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2.5
6.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
2.0
4.7
4.1
3.6
3.6
3.0
2.1
2.0
1.8
1.7
1.3
1.5
1.0
2.0
2011
2.0
2.0
1.8
2012
1.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
2010
2.5
1.0
0.5
1.0
2009
2.7
2.5
1.5
3.0
2008
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
www.shadac.org
Indiana
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
10%
9%
9%
23%
2011
2010
26%
8%
9%
30%
30%
30%
61%
65%
67%
2012
Private Coverage
62%
62%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
1.2
7.0
7.0
1.1
1.1
1.0
6.0
5.3
5.0
5.0
5.1
4.8
4.0
0.9
0.9
0.8
2.2
2.0
2.0
1.6
1.4
1.5
1.6
0.6
3.0
1.0
0.4
2.0
0.5
0.2
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
36
www.shadac.org
Iowa
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
5%
5%
21%
22%
2010
2011
2012
5%
5%
5%
25%
25%
70%
73%
74%
27%
Private Coverage
69%
71%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
3.0
11.0
10.0
2.5
8.0
2.0
6.0
1.5
3.5
4.0
2.0
0.0
4.0
2.4
2008
2009
N/A
N/A
3.0
2010
2011
2012
2.7
2.3
2.5
1.5
1.9
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.0
3.6
3.3
3.5
1.0
0.5
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
N/A
2010
2011
0.5
0.0
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
www.shadac.org
Kansas
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
8%
8%
9%
20%
2011
2010
6%
22%
23%
28%
64%
67%
70%
Private Coverage
7%
27%
69%
72%
2012
Public Coverage
Uninsured
13.9
14.0
12.0
10.3
10.0
8.0
6.4
6.0
3.7
4.0
2.0
N/A
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.3
1.3
3.1
2.9
3.0
1.5
1.3
3.2
3.5
1.8
2.3
2.5
2.0
1.7
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
38
www.shadac.org
Kentucky
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
6%
6%
6%
31%
59%
62%
38%
60%
Private Coverage
6%
6%
34%
35%
2012
2011
2010
Public Coverage
35%
56%
59%
Uninsured
1.4
4.3
4.1
3.7
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.8
2009
2010
2011
2.5
2.5
2.0
1.5
0.4
1.0
0.2
0.5
1.7
0.0
2008
2012
3.0
2.9
3.0
0.6
0.0
2008
3.5
2.5
0.8
0.8
3.8
3.7
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
www.shadac.org
Louisiana
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
8%
6%
7%
53%
39%
51%
42%
2011
2010
6%
6%
48%
45%
Private Coverage
2012
50%
44%
Public Coverage
48%
46%
Uninsured
3.0
2.8
2.5
2.2
1.9
2.0
1.7
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
3.0
1.6
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.1
2.7
2.6
2.8
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
40
www.shadac.org
Maine
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
5%
4%
6%
30%
33%
37%
59%
60%
65%
5%
6%
37%
34%
2012
2011
2010
Private Coverage
59%
61%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
0.0
2008
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
99%
98%
97%
96%
95%
94%
93%
92%
91%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
www.shadac.org
Maryland
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
6%
2010
5%
5%
20%
24%
26%
2012
5%
4%
28%
27%
Private Coverage
68%
68%
68%
71%
74%
2011
Public Coverage
Uninsured
6.0
6.0
5.8
5.4
4.7
5.0
3.8
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
3.8
4.0
3.5
2.7
3.0
1.2
3.6
3.3
3.1
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
42
www.shadac.org
Massachusetts
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2008
2%
21%
2009
2010
2011
2012
2%
2%
2%
1%
23%
25%
71%
73%
76%
78%
27%
27%
Private Coverage
Public Coverage
72%
Uninsured
6.0
1.6
5.5
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.4
5.0
4.2
4.0
1.4
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.0
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
N/A
0.0
0.0
2008
1.4
1.0
0.4
1.0
1.4
1.3
1.5
0.8
0.6
2.0
2.4
2.0
1.0
2.7
3.0
3.0
2.5
1.2
3.9
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
www.shadac.org
Michigan
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
5%
5%
27%
30%
2010
2011
2012
5%
4%
5%
33%
34%
Private Coverage
61%
62%
63%
65%
68%
34%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
1.6
5.8
6.0
1.4
2.5
1.4
1.3
4.1
3.9
4.0
4.0
3.8
1.1
1.1
1.2
5.0
0.9
1.0
2.0
1.8
2.1
1.9
1.5
1.5
1.5
0.8
3.0
1.0
0.6
2.0
0.4
1.0
0.5
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
44
www.shadac.org
Minnesota
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
6%
6%
7%
16%
21%
22%
72%
74%
75%
78%
Private Coverage
6%
6%
19%
18%
2012
2011
2010
Public Coverage
73%
Uninsured
2.5
2.0
9.1
10.0
8.0
2.2
11.6
12.0
7.3
1.5
7.1
6.5
6.0
1.4
1.5
2008
2009
1.5
1.4
1.0
4.0
0.5
2.0
0.0
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2010
2011
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
4.4
4.1
3.8
3.6
3.1
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
www.shadac.org
Mississippi
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
13%
2011
2010
8%
9%
11%
41%
37%
8%
44%
49%
50%
2012
46%
47%
Private Coverage
45%
46%
Public Coverage
47%
Uninsured
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
1.4
4.3
3.6
3.1
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.0
2009
2010
2011
3.5
2.8
2.1
1.7
2.0
0.6
1.5
0.4
1.0
0.2
0.5
0.0
2008
2012
2.8
2.5
0.0
2008
3.7
4.0
3.0
1.0
0.8
2.2
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
46
www.shadac.org
Missouri
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
7%
7%
8%
26%
2011
2010
7%
29%
28%
8%
29%
31%
Private Coverage
61%
63%
64%
64%
67%
2012
Public Coverage
Uninsured
1.2
5.7
5.5
6.0
5.0
1.2
4.6
4.3
4.5
1.1
1.1
1.1
2.5
1.0
4.0
1.1
3.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.5
0.0
0.9
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2.9
3.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
2.3
2.4
2.5
2010
2011
2012
1.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
www.shadac.org
Montana
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
15%
13%
14%
19%
25%
66%
27%
62%
Private Coverage
12%
13%
25%
61%
2012
2011
2010
Public Coverage
53%
35%
60%
Uninsured
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
2.7
2.4
2.5
2.3
2.0
2.0
1.0
2008
2009
N/A
N/A
2010
2011
2012
1.5
1.0
1.5
N/A
2.3
2.5
3.6
3.5
1.8
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
N/A
N/A
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
48
www.shadac.org
Nebraska
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
7%
6%
7%
17%
25%
25%
69%
75%
67%
70%
Private Coverage
6%
7%
25%
25%
2012
2011
2010
Public Coverage
69%
Uninsured
3.0
14.6
14.0
2.7
2.5
12.0
2.0
10.0
8.0
0.0
2008
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2009
2010
2011
2012
4.8
4.4
3.0
3.0
2.8
2.0
1.0
0.5
2.0
5.5
4.0
1.4
1.0
4.0
6.0
5.0
2.2
2.0
1.5
6.0
N/A
0.0
2008
2009
0.0
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
www.shadac.org
Nevada
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
12%
17%
20%
65%
67%
17%
22%
61%
Private Coverage
2012
17%
18%
19%
21%
2011
2010
Public Coverage
24%
62%
59%
Uninsured
1.4
7.2
7.0
6.4
6.1
6.0
5.3
5.0
1.2
1.0
4.9
1.2
3.0
1.3
1.1
1.0
0.9
2.0
0.4
1.0
0.2
2008
2009
2010
2011
2.2
2.2
2011
2012
0.5
0.0
2008
2012
2.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.3
1.5
0.6
3.0
2.4
2.5
2.0
0.8
4.0
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
50
www.shadac.org
New Hampshire
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
5%
2010
5%
5%
18%
21%
2012
3%
4%
23%
22%
26%
73%
74%
77%
2011
Private Coverage
70%
74%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
4.0
3.4
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
0.5
0.0
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
N/A
N/A
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
www.shadac.org
New Jersey
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
7%
2010
6%
7%
19%
21%
23%
2012
6%
5%
25%
26%
Private Coverage
69%
69%
70%
73%
74%
2011
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2.5
7.8
7.5
5.9
6.3
5.8
2.1
1.8
2.0
1.8
1.7
1.9
3.4
3.5
3.4
3.2
3.0
2.7
2.9
2011
2012
2.5
1.5
2.0
1.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
52
www.shadac.org
New Mexico
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
13%
11%
13%
39%
9%
10%
45%
47%
2012
2011
2010
42%
46%
43%
42%
Private Coverage
46%
45%
49%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
6.0
5.2
5.0
5.6
5.1
3.5
3.6
4.0
3.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
N/A
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2.6
2.5
2.5
1.8
2.0
1.4
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
2012
2.7
2.5
3.8
4.0
2.5
2.9
3.0
5.0
3.9
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
www.shadac.org
New York
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
6%
2010
5%
5%
28%
31%
33%
2012
5%
4%
34%
34%
61%
62%
65%
67%
2011
Private Coverage
Public Coverage
62%
Uninsured
4.1
4.0
3.6
3.4
3.4
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2.5
1.8
1.7
2.1
1.7
1.6
2.0
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
54
www.shadac.org
North Carolina
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
10%
9%
8%
29%
61%
32%
36%
56%
Private Coverage
8%
8%
35%
59%
2012
2011
2010
Public Coverage
37%
56%
55%
Uninsured
7.0
1.6
6.0
5.2
4.8
5.0
1.4
5.1
1.2
3.9
4.0
1.3
1.2
1.1
3.5
2.5
0.8
2.0
0.6
1.5
0.4
1.0
1.0
0.2
0.5
0.0
0.0
3.0
2.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
3.8
3.2
3.0
1.0
4.0
3.5
3.1
2.9
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
www.shadac.org
North Dakota
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
7%
7%
6%
14%
14%
2011
2010
8%
15%
79%
7%
15%
19%
74%
79%
80%
Private Coverage
2012
Public Coverage
78%
Uninsured
8.0
7.0
7.1
6.0
5.0
5.0
4.6
4.0
3.0
4.0
2.4
2.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.0
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
2012
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
99%
98%
97%
96%
95%
94%
93%
92%
91%
90%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
56
www.shadac.org
Ohio
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
7%
6%
7%
23%
27%
6%
6%
29%
31%
30%
Private Coverage
63%
63%
64%
66%
70%
2012
2011
2010
Public Coverage
Uninsured
5.6
5.3
1.2
5.3
4.7
5.0
4.2
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
4.0
0.8
3.0
0.6
2.0
0.4
1.0
0.2
0.0
0.8
0.7
2009
2010
2011
2012
2.5
1.9
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
2008
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
www.shadac.org
Oklahoma
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
12%
11%
12%
31%
56%
54%
34%
11%
11%
52%
37%
Private Coverage
2012
2011
2010
52%
37%
Public Coverage
52%
38%
Uninsured
4.0
2.5
3.4
3.5
2.9
3.0
2.9
2.4
2.5
2.3
1.9
2.0
1.5
1.7
1.7
1.4
0.0
2009
2010
2011
2012
2.2
2.2
2010
2011
1.8
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
2008
2.6
2.0
0.5
0.5
3.0
2.5
1.0
1.0
3.5
3.0
2.0
1.5
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
58
www.shadac.org
Oregon
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
12%
28%
25%
6%
34%
33%
59%
62%
64%
68%
2012
7%
9%
11%
19%
2011
2010
Private Coverage
Public Coverage
60%
Uninsured
7.3
1.4
6.8
7.0
1.2
6.0
1.0
4.8
5.0
4.2
4.0
4.0
3.0
1.2
1.0
1.1
1.1
0.9
2.0
0.4
1.0
0.2
2008
2009
2010
2011
1.9
1.5
1.6
2011
2012
1.0
0.5
0.0
2008
2012
1.9
1.5
0.0
0.0
2.5
2.5
2.0
0.8
0.6
3.0
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs.
Note: If the relative standard error of an estimate exceeds 30% then it is not included in the graphs. See tables below for more detail.
www.shadac.org
Pennsylvania
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
6%
2010
5%
5%
23%
26%
27%
2012
6%
5%
29%
30%
Private Coverage
65%
66%
67%
68%
71%
2011
Public Coverage
Uninsured
5.5
5.2
5.0
5.3
4.8
4.6
1.4
2.5
1.2
1.2
1.2
3.0
2.0
2.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
4.0
2.0
0.8
1.5
0.6
1.0
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
1.4
1.5
2011
2012
0.0
0.0
2008
1.3
0.5
0.2
0.0
1.6
0.9
0.4
1.0
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
relative
standard
error of anerror
estimate
30% then
it is not included
in theitgraphs.
tables below
for more
detail.
Note:If the
If the
relative
standard
of exceeds
an estimate
exceeds
30% then
is notSee
included
in the
graphs.
60
www.shadac.org
Rhode Island
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
5%
2010
5%
5%
19%
26%
26%
2012
4%
6%
28%
28%
Private Coverage
66%
68%
69%
69%
75%
2011
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2.5
2.2
2.0
1.5
1.0
1.0
0.5
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
0.0
N/A
2008
2009
N/A
N/A
2010
2011
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
3.9
3.1
1.6
2008
2012
2009
2010
1.9
1.9
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
98%
97%
96%
95%
94%
2009
2012
2010
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
99%
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
www.shadac.org
South Carolina
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
11%
10%
10%
27%
61%
32%
36%
55%
Private Coverage
8%
9%
34%
58%
2012
2011
2010
Public Coverage
54%
38%
55%
Uninsured
6.0
5.5
1.6
5.4
1.4
5.0
4.1
3.3
3.0
1.3
3.0
1.0
1.0
0.8
2008
2009
2010
2011
2.0
0.4
1.0
0.2
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
2008
2012
2.3
2.1
1.5
0.6
1.0
2.7
2.5
2.5
0.8
2.0
3.3
3.5
1.4
1.4
1.2
4.0
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If the
relative
standardstandard
error of an error
estimateofexceeds
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
in the it
graphs.
tables below
detail.
Note:
If the
relative
an estimate
30% then
is notSee
included
in for
themore
graphs.
62
www.shadac.org
South Dakota
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
9%
7%
7%
29%
26%
67%
67%
4%
6%
24%
26%
24%
2012
2011
2010
Private Coverage
67%
68%
69%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
7.0
5.9
6.0
6.2
5.0
5.0
4.0
3.7
3.0
2.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.0
N/A
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
2012
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
99%
98%
97%
96%
95%
94%
93%
92%
91%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
www.shadac.org
Tennessee
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
7%
6%
6%
29%
2011
2010
33%
6%
35%
Private Coverage
6%
36%
59%
61%
64%
2012
Public Coverage
35%
57%
59%
Uninsured
1.4
6.1
6.0
5.0
1.3
4.7
4.1
3.8
4.0
6.0
1.3
1.1
1.2
5.3
1.1
0.9
1.0
3.0
0.6
2.0
0.4
1.0
0.2
2009
2010
2011
2012
3.3
3.3
3.4
2009
2010
2011
3.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2008
5.2
5.0
4.0
0.8
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
64
www.shadac.org
Texas
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
17%
50%
52%
54%
29%
13%
14%
15%
17%
2012
2011
2010
Private Coverage
49%
50%
38%
36%
35%
31%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
4.5
1.6
4.5
4.4
1.4
3.8
2.6
1.4
1.3
1.2
2.9
1.2
1.2
2009
2010
2011
1.1
2.4
2.4
1.0
2.3
0.8
2.2
0.6
2.1
0.4
2.0
0.2
1.9
2.2
2.2
2.1
1.8
2008
2012
2.5
2.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If the
relative
standardstandard
error of an error
estimateofexceeds
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
in the it
graphs.
tables below
detail.
Note:
If the
relative
an estimate
30% then
is notSee
included
in for
themore
graphs.
www.shadac.org
Utah
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
12%
11%
10%
14%
12%
10%
11%
17%
17%
17%
72%
75%
75%
2012
2011
2010
Private Coverage
72%
Public Coverage
73%
Uninsured
2.5
8.2
8.1
2.0
6.0
2.2
2.0
5.6
1.5
1.3
1.5
1.3
1.0
0.5
N/A
2008
0.0
2009
2010
2011
2012
2008
2009
2010
2011
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
4.5
4.3
2008
2012
3.6
3.5
2009
2010
2011
4.2
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
66
www.shadac.org
Vermont
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
4%
3%
3%
2%
3%
31%
34%
36%
41%
62%
65%
39%
57%
Private Coverage
58%
62%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
99%
98%
97%
96%
95%
94%
93%
92%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If the
relative
standardstandard
error of an error
estimateofexceeds
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
in the it
graphs.
tables below
detail.
Note:
If the
relative
an estimate
30% then
is notSee
included
in for
themore
graphs.
www.shadac.org
Virginia
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
8%
7%
7%
17%
2011
2010
19%
6%
20%
23%
71%
71%
73%
Private Coverage
6%
23%
74%
75%
2012
Public Coverage
Uninsured
1.7
1.7
7.3
7.0
6.3
6.1
6.0
1.7
5.9
4.9
5.0
1.6
1.6
1.6
4.0
1.5
3.0
1.5
2.0
1.4
1.0
1.4
0.0
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.3
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2008
2009
2010
2011
4.7
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
3.7
3.3
3.0
2.2
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
68
www.shadac.org
Washington
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
8%
7%
7%
24%
2011
2010
28%
6%
6%
31%
31%
31%
63%
64%
68%
2012
Private Coverage
63%
Public Coverage
63%
Uninsured
5.3
5.2
5.0
4.2
3.9
3.8
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.7
3.0
2.6
2.7
2.5
1.5
2.0
1.4
2.0
2010
2011
2.2
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.9
1.0
0.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If the
relative
standardstandard
error of an error
estimateofexceeds
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
in the it
graphs.
tables below
detail.
Note:
If the
relative
an estimate
30% then
is notSee
included
in for
themore
graphs.
www.shadac.org
West Virginia
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
7%
2010
6%
6%
33%
34%
37%
Private Coverage
2012
6%
5%
35%
38%
57%
60%
61%
2011
Public Coverage
56%
60%
Uninsured
1.4
5.1
5.0
1.3
1.2
1.0
1.0
4.0
0.8
3.0
0.6
2.0
0.4
1.0
0.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
N/A
2011
0.2
0.0
2012
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
N/A
2010
2011
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
2012
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
70
www.shadac.org
Wisconsin
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
5%
2010
6%
5%
20%
24%
27%
2012
5%
5%
27%
29%
66%
68%
71%
75%
2011
Private Coverage
Public Coverage
68%
Uninsured
7.7
7.3
7.0
6.9
5.9
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1.7
4.0
1.4
1.2
1.4
1.1
3.3
3.5
3.6
3.5
2.9
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2012
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If the
relative
standardstandard
error of an error
estimateofexceeds
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
in the it
graphs.
tables below
detail.
Note:
If the
relative
an estimate
30% then
is notSee
included
in for
themore
graphs.
www.shadac.org
Wyoming
Sources of Insurance Coverage
2009
2008
10%
8%
9%
19%
2011
2010
23%
9%
10%
21%
28%
24%
64%
68%
71%
2012
Private Coverage
66%
70%
Public Coverage
Uninsured
3.0
1.5
2.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
0.8
2008
2009
2010
N/A
N/A
2011
2012
0.0
2008
N/A
N/A
N/A
2009
2010
2011
2.6
2.1
1.0
0.5
0.5
N/A
2.5
2.5
1.0
N/A
0.0
2012
N/A
N/A
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2008
2009
2010
2008
2012
White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
139-400% FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2009
2012
2011
2012
Non-White
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011
2010
2008
2009
Private Coverage
2010
2011
401%+ FPG
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
Hispanic
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2012
2008
Public Coverage
Uninsured
2009
2010
Note:
If theIf relative
standardstandard
error of an estimate
30% thenexceeds
it is not included
the graphs.
Seeincluded
tables below
more
detail.
Note:
the relative
error ofexceeds
an estimate
30% in
then
it is not
infor
the
graphs.
72
www.shadac.org
For more than 40 years the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has worked to improve the
health and health care of all Americans. We are striving to build a national culture of health
that will enable all Americans to live longer, healthier lives now and for generations to come.
For more information, visit www.rwjf.org. Follow the Foundation on Twitter at
www.rwjf.org/twitter or on Facebook at www.rwjf.org/facebook.
The State Health Access Data Assistance Center is an independent health policy research
center located at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health. SHADAC is a
resource for helping states collect and use data for health policy, with a particular focus on
monitoring rates of health insurance coverage and understanding factors associated with
uninsurance. For more information, please contact us at shadac@umn.edu, or call
612-624-4802.
Report Authors
Julie Sonier, Deputy Director
Julie has over 15 years of experience in the development and implementation of state-level health reforms, with a
particular focus on using data to understand state-level trends and to inform policy decisions that improve health
care cost, access, and quality. She assists states with modeling the state-level impacts of health care reforms, designing and implementing multipayer health care payment reform initiatives, creating frameworks for measuring the
impacts of reforms, and implementing Medicaid-related provisions of the Affordable Care Act.
Other Contributors:
Amy Potthoff Anderson, Writing
Bree Allen, Design and Layout
Andrea Stronghart, Design and Layout
Sign up to receive
our newsletter
and updates at
www.shadac.org
04072014
74