A neighborhood’s resources determine future of its children

Posted by:

You can determine the opportunities a Franklin County child will likely
have by his neighborhood. Social determinants like health, education and
incarceration rates are indicators for success and portend a bleak future for
many neighborhoods. What’s to be done? First, let’s look at the numbers.  

If you live in Upper Arlington, your life expectancy is 82 to 84 years, according to the Kirwin Institute at The Ohio State University. For someone in southern Franklinton, it’s 64 to 71 years, and nearly half of your neighbors live at the poverty level ($25,750 for a family of four). If you live in southern Columbus, the Centers for Disease Control tell us you have a roughly 10 percent chance of suffering from heart disease; the rate is about 2 percent in the northwest part of town.

Ten percent of Franklin County residents do not have a high school
diploma or GED. For South Linden, it’s 26 percent. The incarceration rate for
Franklin County is three percent, while it’s nearly 17 percent for South Linden.

These statistics correlate with an opportunity index the Ohio House
Financing Agency has developed. The county’s northwest quadrant rates a very
high opportunity index. The southeast ranks mostly low and very low.

HUD Secretary Ben Carson says that personal success is based on a “state of mind.” Sounds simple enough, but how do you create that “state of mind” when your neighborhood is blighted?

A study funded by the CDC and two foundations concluded that nine steps, when implemented together—ranging from increasing employment opportunities to investing in high quality childcare and early education—will reduce poverty. All great ideas, but effecting change on this level is a tall order.

The Franklin County commissioners launched a blueprint last June with 120 recommendations for reducing poverty with goals of increased employment and higher paying jobs, more job training and greater academic success. Affordable housing is also part of the plan.

Bravo! But all this takes time, and much of the blueprint is in its initial state of planning stage and subject to the sway of politics. Historically, tax cuts for the wealthy and incentives for big business are what readily appeal to legislators.

A local initiative, Move to Prosper, has formed its own strategy, based on Maslow’s hierarch of needs. Before self-actualization can happen, physical needs, such as food and shelter, and safety needs, such as personal security and employment, must be met. If these basic needs aren’t met, individuals can’t progress.

Loosely translated: if it’s too hard to improve a neighborhood, then find a better one. Think about it—that’s what people of means do. A study published in 2016 in the American Economic Review confirms the importance of neighborhood in a child’s development, as does a study published this year by the Heller School for Social Policy and Management at Brandeis University. 

Move to Prosper helps single mothers, who earn 50 percent of the county’s median income and have one to three children, all under 13 years of age, move from neighborhoods with high poverty rates to neighborhoods with low crime rates, better housing and better performing schools. The program provides life coaching, limited assistance with rent, and goal setting.

It’s a small operation and still in its infancy, but the results are promising. After four months in the pilot program, the nine participants were interviewed. Eight reported being better off financially and improved mental health, seven saw improvements in their children’s behavior, and five saw improvements in their children’s health.

As one mother put it, “This is changing our life. It’s helping us get on our feet and giving us tools to maintain that life.”

Project facilitator Amy Klaben and her steering committee want to grow the program to 100 women. “We’re proving that lifting families out of poverty requires a comprehensive approach, and we’ve got a formula that works.”  

_______________________________________

Jack D’Aurora writes for Considerthisbyjd.com

_____________________________________________________ 

5
  Related Posts
  • No related posts found.

Comments

  1. Debbie  February 17, 2020

    Starts with education….and nothing done yet after all these years!!!

    “DeRolph v. State
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Seal of the Supreme Court of Ohio
    DeRolph v. State is a landmark case in Ohio constitutional law in which the Supreme Court of Ohio ruled that the state’s method for funding public education was unconstitutional.[1] On March 24, 1997, the Supreme Court of Ohio ruled in a 4-3 decision that the state funding system “fails to provide for a thorough and efficient system of common schools,” as required by the Ohio Constitution, and directed the state to find a remedy.[2] The court would look at the case several times over the next 12 years before it relinquished jurisdiction, but the underlying problems with the school funding system remain to this day.[1]”

    reply
    • Stephen Courts  February 17, 2020

      Debbie, it is not a coincidence that the DRolph case was just a year or two after the loons on the extreme right took control of the state government. They want nothing to do with implementing what the ruling demanded. Guns, tax cuts for the upper 10% & l taking a woman reproductive rights away. It is embarrassing to call Ohio home.

      reply
  2. Bruce Lackey  February 17, 2020

    We also need to begin to address the supply side and not just the demand side of this dilemma.

    reply
  3. Mike ratliff  February 17, 2020

    Jack, you failed to recognize the absolute root problem in any impoverished neighborhood. The ever increasing illegitimacy rate/ single mother/ lack of involved fathers since the 1960’s will correlate with the problems you outline. All the well intentioned government programs at best may put a dent in the problem or at worst exasperate it based on what side of the spectrum someone falls. But unfortunately as a society we’ve fallen down the slippery slope of moral relativism and acceptance of single parent households and the idea that government is an acceptable replacement for fatherhood.

    reply
    • Ron  February 25, 2020

      While i do not endorse the moral fingerpointing inherent in the prior comment, that writer is spot on in placing the geneses of many of these problems on paternal absenteeism. The problems only expand from there. Much of our widespread societal drug abuse has it’s beginnings in parental absenteeism or dysfunction. These root issues make the substantial expenditure of public funds to cure symptoms rather than causes a useless exercise. I do not see a cure for poverty, crime, drug abuse, or single parent households by pouring more money into schools. I do see some potential in teaching trades once a child has attained sufficient maturity to realize the path taken leads only to compounding of misery and must be addressed.. Programs such as “Move to Prosper”, while partially successful in benefiting the selected participants,will help only the few who are sufficiently motivated to put in the effort that real change always requires.

      reply

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published and your last name is optional.