Citation
Geographical patterns of well-being in Colorado

Material Information

Title:
Geographical patterns of well-being in Colorado
Creator:
Penny, Chris D
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
55, [11] leaves : chart, maps ; 30 cm

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Economic history ( fast )
Social conditions ( fast )
Social conditions -- Colorado ( lcsh )
Economic conditions -- Colorado ( lcsh )
Colorado ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 50-51).
General Note:
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Master of Planning and Community Development, College of Design and Planning.
Statement of Responsibility:
Chris D. Penny.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
11930329 ( OCLC )
ocm11930329
Classification:
LD1190.A78 1984 .P46 ( lcc )

Full Text
Environmental desicn
xauraria
f
J3E^0GRAPHICAL
PATTERNS
F WELL-EffelNG IN COLORADO
S ;
'*TF DUE
Planning and Community Development
Chris D. Ppriny Thesis P-rbject May 1984


TABLE OF CONTENTS
7
PREFACE
INPRODUCTION
PROBLEM STATEMENT PURPOSE
LITERATURE REVIEW AND MSITORY OF SOCIAL INDICATORS
DEFINITIONS OF SOCIAL INDICATORS
FRAMEWORKS FOR DEVELOPING SOCIAL INDICATORS WARREN GROSS
SHELDON AND MOORE OTHER FRAMEWORKS SUMMARY OF FRAMEWORKS
METHODOLOGY
DATA GATHERING PHASE LIMITATIONS AND DATA CONCERNS FACTOR ANALYSIS
REVIEW OF QUALITY OF LIFE FACTOR ANALYTIC STUDIES
INTERPRETATION OF THE FACTOR MATRIX VARIMAX ROTATED FACTOR MATRIX
REGIONAL GEOGRAPHIC PATTERNS OF WELL-BEING SOCIO-ECONOMIC DIMENSION HEALTH DIMENSION ALIENATION DIMENSION IINCORPORATED PLACE SUMMARY
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
i
1
1
1
5
a
9
12
15
17
1?
21
21
-~r
29
35
3 6
33
38
39
40
41
44


REFERENCES
FIGURES
SOCIO-ECONOMIC DI MENS I ON MAP HEALTH DIMENSION MAP ALIENATION DIMENSION MAP GRAPH OF CITIES OVER 25,000
I INCORPORATED PLACE RANK INGS


PREFACE
This paper approaches a quality of life study by incorporating concepts and ideas drawn from research concerned with describing elements of social systems and some of the important sub-elements of those systems. It would be improper to suggest. that this effort describes objective conditions without error, nonetheless, working within certain limitations (time, data cost. and availability) the overall patterns provide an interesting perspective for viewing Colorado. Newcomers to Colorado may find the results helpful in getting acquainted with the diverse areas of the state. Although the results may or may not surprise people living and working in specific counties or towns they may find it useful to be able to compare and
contrast t heir areas with others and hopeful 1y gain new
i nsi ghts into problems. The results may possi b1y mot i vate
regi ons and places to attempt to ' improve their overal1
performance.
I


Specifically, this paper will attempt to "make sense" out of the data collected by using factor analysis to develop "composite indicators of well-being" for each town and county in Colorado. Factor analytic techniques are very useful in that they allow one to see whether there is a pattern of relationship among a set of variables. From these patterns, the set of variables can be reduced to a smaller set of measures, which would adequately describe well-being. A more detailed description of this methodology will follow in Chapter 4.
The questions asked above reflect a basic concern for our "quality of life." Improving the quality of life is the underlying concern for most planning efforts. The term "quality of life" is a very subjective concept which is difficult to adequately define in precise terms. In our present society many have come to equate the good life with economic affluence. Various economic indicators have been developed to measure our level of "well-being". The Gross National Product along with the consumer price index and wholesale price index have traditional1y been our main indicators of economic performance and therefore our well-being. In the past 25 years, more and more attention has been given to other factors which significantly influence our quality of life.
2


LITERATURE REVIEW AND HISTORY OF SOCIAL INDICATORS
In the early 1960s, President Kennedys Science Advisory Committee recommended that a systematic collection of basic behavioral data -for the United States be undertaken (Lear, 1972). Lyndon Johnsons Great Society expressed concern -for our quality o-f li-fe (Campbell, 1931), stating that "the Great Society looks beyond the prospects of abundance to the problems o-f abundance. The task o-f the Great Society is to ensure our people the environment, the capabilities, and the social structures which will give them a meaningful chance to pursue their individual happiness. Thus the Great Society is concerned not with how much, but with how goodnot the quantity o-f goods but the quality o-f our lives."
In 1967, then Senator Mondale introduced a bill designed to create a Council o-f Social Advisors which would report on the state o-f the nations social health (Campbell, 1972). Also in the mid-60s, Raymond Bauers book entitled SOCIAL INDICATORS (1966) popularized the term "social indicators." In 1969, President Nixon established the National Goals Research Staff which was to develop and monitor social indicators that could reflect the present and future quality of American life and the direction and rate of its change (Campbell, 1972).
The social indicator movement of the 60s and 70s was in
3


response to the growing interest in the aspects of our well-being other than economic aspects. This movement gained momentum due to both the success of purely economic indicators and the failure of these indicators to adequately assess the nations overall well-being (Campbell, 1972).
4


DEFINITIONS OF SOCIAL INDICATORS
From the literature, it is clear that there are many different interpretations of the term "social indicators". The following definitions are offered in order to give the reader a general idea of what is meant by the term.
Social indicators is defined by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare document, TOWARD A SOCIAL REPORT, as "a statistic of direct normative interest which facilitates concise comprehensive and balanced judgments about the condition of major aspects of a society. It is in all cases a direct measure of welfare and is subject to the interpretation that, if it changes in the "right direction", while other things remain equal, things have gotten better, or people are "better off"(Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1969).
Christakis and Kamray (1970) in SOCIAL INDICATORS IN PERSPECTIVE define the term as "...an attempt to describe with some precision and detail, the condition of society in terms of particular activities and social groups. It is a relative notion to be measured and/or quantified against some defined standard of unit that represents the quality of a good life."
In Bauers SOCIAL INDICATORS (1966), Albert Biderman states that his main interest is in quantitative data that serve as indices to socially important conditions of society. His primary concern is in the relatively neglected areas of
5


nan-economic "social statistics".
Ida Merriam (1963) states in INDICATORS OF SOCIAL CHANGE that, "If the basic purpose is to measure change in overall welfare, we must look for an indicator that lends itself to repeated use and to the provision of meaningful trend data. An indicator in this context is not intended to mean just a congeries of statistical data".
Sheldon and Moore (1968) propose that "social indicators are time series data that allow comparisons over an extended period which permit one to grasp long term as well as unusually sharp fluctuation rates.
Louis Guttman (1971) states that the term "social indicator" is too broad. He could find no way of defining this
term which would exclude any type of observations on social
/
behavior. This meant including all of sociology and perhaps all of social science.
It seems evident that although the term can be defined in many ways, the one common element in the definitions is that social indicators are concerned with measuring some aspect of our welfare. Many policy makers utilize single indicators in attempts to solve problems and improve the general welfare. Attempting to change single indicators one at a time can be ineffective due to the fact that most problems are the result of a number of interrelated factors. As Merriam's definition
6


states, "an indicator...is not intended to mean a single series of figures. It does mean an interrelated set of measures, not just a congeries of statistical data."
The statistical technique used in this project, factor analysis, accomplishes the task of interrelating individual variables and thereby making them easier to interpret.
The following section will describe various approaches to indicator development. This section will also present different frameworks used to develop general categories of social i ndi cators.
7


FRAMEWORKS FOR DEVELOPING SOCIAL INDICATORS
How does one go about determining what to measure? Duncan (1969) states that there are two basic ways of selecting indicators. The -first, theoretical deductive, uses existing theory to select indicators of well-being. The second approach, empirical inductive, relies on the intuition of the researcher for selecting indicators which seem relevant to the particular study. It is evident that both approaches are needed to deveolp indicators, and that one does not exclude the other.
The first question that needed to be answered concerned the scope and substantive contents to be addressed by the indicators. Without some type of framework to act as a general guide, it is difficult to interpret individual pieces of information or to decide which pieces to include in an analysis.
A number of methods utilized to study communities in terms of quality of life issues were reviewed. These frameworks served as the basis by which information was chosen to be included in the analysis. Approaches by Warren (197S), Gross (1966), and Sheldon and Moore (1968) are discussed below.. Warren addressed the issue at the community level, and specifically the value of studying the communities as social systems. Gross- framework describes the elements which should
3


/
be addressed at a national level and Sheldon and Moores book contains chapters dealing with the functional feature of a society. If we can view communities as social systems, we can use frameworks for nations and attempt to determine what data concerned with these aspects or features are available at the municipal and county levels.
WARREN
Warren defines community in the following manner:
Community that combination of social units and systems that perform the major social functions having locality relevance. The functions having locality relevance include;
1. Product!on-distribution-comsumption This refers to the local participation in the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. The institutions or groups who provide these functions include business and service organizations and the general public.
2. Socialization Refers to the process by which values, knowledge, and behavior patterns become established. This process is carried out mainly by the family and educational insti tutions..
3". Social control Refers to the process which influences the members of a community to conform to its norms. There are both internal and external controls which relate to this process.
9


4. Social participation Re-fers to the many opportunities to participate in society- These opportunities are offered through many organizations. A few of these would include economic, governmental, and welfare groups, as well as educational, religious and cultural groups
5. Mutual support This refers to the support given by a variety of sources. These include the family, neighbors, friends, and voluntary organizations. In addition to the family, voluntary and public agencies such as mental health clinics, employment offices, veterans administration, and social security offices provide this function of support.
Warren (197S) describes a number of different ways of examining communities as objects of study. These approaches include examining the spatial relationships between people and the institutions of a community which look into the various goods and services, and facilities available in different sized communities and the interrelation of these different sized communities in terms of their geographical distribution as well as their trade and other reciprocal relationships.
He discusses the considerations which should be given to the communitys population. By examining demographic data, one can learn a variety of things about a community such as age
structure,, percentage of people in various age groups and
the


racial makeup of a community.
A third approach to viewing a community involves studying the values and institutions which are shared by the people in a community. Warren states that from an ecological standpoint, the chief reason for existence of the community is that of making accessible locally the various institutional facilities needed for daily living.
Robert Lynds study of "Middletown" assumed that things people do can be put into one or more of the following categories: making a living, making a home, training the young, leisure activities, religion, and community activities.
A fourth concept of the community as discussed by Warren is that concerned with the interaction of the local people. The examination of this concept would involve examining interaction among local people and the major institutions such as the family, the church, government, educational systems, and economic systems.
The fifth approach is concerned with examining the communitys power structure. Analysis of a communitys power structure can help one gain a perspective as to who in the community wields the most power.
Warren describes an approach which applies social-system analysis to community phenomenon. Talcott Parson described the social system as "a plurality of individual actors interacting
1 1


with each other in a situation which has at least a physical or
environmental aspect, actors who are motivated in terms of a tendency to the optimization of gratification and whose relation to their situations, including each other, is defined and mediated in terms of a system of culturally structured and shared svmbols."
GROSS
The structural composition of the social system needs to be investigated in order to further examine the areas of concern which might be measured. Bertram Gross (1966) describes the structure of any social system as consisting of seven interrelated elements. These include:
1. People and
2. Non-human resources
3. Grouped together into sub-systems that
4. interrelate among themselves and
5. with the external environment, and are subject to
6. certain values and
7. a central guidance system that may help provide the capacity for future performance.
The basic. element of a soci al system i s the people, and the
basic way of understanding this element is to examine the
popui ati on itself. Learning about the quantity and types of
people in the community is essential. Gross notes that the most
obvious aspect of population quality is that relating to health. However, the basic indicators of health are based on the
1 2


incidence of disease. Increased
incidence of disease can be
attributed to a number of factors from improved data collection to better diagnosis. Gross warns that these indicators should be examined with caution and suggests that it would be more useful to have indicators of positive rather than negative health.
Gross describes the second element of the social system in terms of non-human resources. These non-human resources include the air, light, water, soil, minerals, flora, and fauna. There are vast amounts of information available on the quantity and
quality of these resources


Brass discusses subsystems of the papulation structure
as an
element in a social system. These subsystems include families, communities, employment organizations, associations, political parties, and governmental and non-governmental organisations.
These subsystems establish the framework of social structure according to Gross. She feels that knowledge, as it pertains to the subsystems, is essential to understanding a society and how efficiently it is functioning.
Employment organizations refers to organizations that employ people for salaries or wages. A basic understanding of the industrial economic structure of an area is a basic requirement. Associations refers to those organizations which people belong to voluntarily. Religious groups and community groups are the types of associations which Gross discusses. It is important to understand the role played by these types of organizations in the community, from influencing governmental policy to giving aid to the needy.
Gross points out that a certain degree of integration of these subsystems is provided by common values but that a guidance system is necessary. She refers to this guidance system as "the state" which essentially refers to all governmental agencies. The concept is relevaent to this study in that many times governmental agencies can affect the quality of life by various


palicy decisians. A1so governmental agencies invoived with pub1ic safety (fire and police) can directly effect the overall quality of life in their daily operations.
The only way to bring about changes in social systems is to change the performance of the system. Gross lists three elements critical for evaluating performance; '(1) acquiring resources, (2)producing outputs for external use and (3)investing in the system in order to maintain the systems performance. In other words, to describe performance, one needs to have information which describes the kind, quality and quantity of output (e.g. base industries and what they produce, health services available at a hospital or the educational activities at a university). Gross points out that by combining elements of structure and performance one can describe the condition of various systems. She also adds that the value of a general system approach to ail possible variables is that it provides a- background for selecting those variables most appropriate to specific situations.
SHELDON AND MOORE
Sheldon and Moores book, INDICATORS OF SOCIAL CHANGE (1963) described the major functional features of a society. They address the central functional features of a societys operation. The way people earn a living, the sice and type of households and
1 5


measurements of education are the types of subjects addressed in the book. Included in the discussion aria the following:
1. The demographic base
2. Production of goods and services
3. Labor force and employment trends
4. Knowledge and technology
5. Poli ti cs
6. The family
7. Pel i gi on
3. Consumption
9. Leisure
10. Health
11. Schooli ng
12. Social mobility
13. Welfare
Conrad Taeuber discusses the influence of population shifts on social change and in discussing the sources and limitations of demographic data states that more frequent data collection and greater speed of publication are needed. The census of population is taken every ten years but detailed information on small areas is usually not available for two or even three years after the census is conducted.
The second and third functional feature described., production of goods and services, and labor force and employment trends encompasses the broad area of economic structure.
Bell discusses knowledge and its relation to technology as an important factor when examining systems and their performance. He describes four basic types of knowledge; practical, intellectual, pastime, and spiritual. When collecting data relating to this broad area it was obvious that the only type of
1 6


Cl a t cl
knowledge mentioned above about which with intellectual knowledge.
col 1ected deals
OTHER FRAMEWORKS
There have been other attempts to construct frameworks for
i ndi cator
work by
Insti tute
development. various org proposes 12
The folio an i z at i on s. categori es
ing are samp The United which should
1
es of this- type of Nations Research be monitored. They
includes
1. Health
2. Nutrition
3. Education
4. Conditions of work
5. Employment situations
6. Aggregate consumption and savings
7. Transportation
3. Housing
9. Clothing
10. Recreation and leisure
11. Social security
12. Human freedoms
In the 1973 Federal government publication, SOCIAL INDICATORS, the areas of concern were:
1. Population
2. Fami1y
3. Housing
4. Social security and welfare 5.. Health, and nutrition
5. Public safety 7. Education
3. Work
9. Income, health and expenditures
10. Culture and leisure
11. Social mobility and participation
These publications reported in detail for the nation a
1 7


variety of abjective (e.g. the number of households living in substandard units) and subjective (e.g.. the number at persons afraid to walk alone at night) indicators.
The Urban Institute(19 ) has developed 14 categories which
can be used to describe living conditions:
1. Income
2. Unemployment
3. Poverty
4. Housing
5. Education
6. Health
7. Mental health 3. Air pollution ?. Public order
10. Tra-f fie safety
11. Racial equality
12. Community concern
13. Citizen participation
14. Social disintegration
Angus Campbell(1968) in his book THE SENSE GF WELL-BEING IN
AMERICA, describes 12 domains of life. These include;
1. Marriage
2. Family life
3. Friendships
4. Standard of living
5. War k
6. Neighborhood
7. City or town of residence 3. The nation
9. Education
10. Housing
11. Health
12. The self
Smith (1973) describes seven general categories to describe
1 8


wel1-being:
1. Income, wealth and employment
2. Living environment 3. Health
4. Education 5- Social order a. social belonging 7. Recreation and leisure
SUMMARY OF FRAMEWORKS
After examining the. categories of indicators which have been proposed, the following areas of community concern represent a synthesis of the previously discussed frameworks. These areas represent the subjects which should be included in a comprehensive quality of life study.
1. Population Information dealing with the general
characteristics of the population is essential for any quality of life study.
2. Family This area is a sub-element of population, but represents a major aspect of quality of life in terms of family stabi1i ty.
3. Housing Housing is a basic requirement for all and the quality of housing can directly effect quality of life-.
4. Health Health is a type of sub-element of population. The degree of health can give an indication of the quality of the populati on.
5. Citizen participation This area gives an indication of the
1 9


level of "community". It can measure in broad terms the level of interaction among the population, and to a degree, community cohesi veness.
6. Leisure The amount of leisure time and the quality of recreation opportunities is an important factor in examining quality of life.
3. Economic conditions This area is usually the foundation of studies concerned with quality. Monetary wealth is necessary to pay the price of services such as health care and education as well as other basic necessities.
9.. Transportai on Transporati on measurements gives an indication of a populations overall mobility and ability to change locations, in responce to changing desires or economic condi ti ons.
10. Public safety This area indicates the degree to which people feel safe in the environment. A very important aspect of quality of life.
11. Education This area is important to study because it gives a general indication as to the intellectual level of a population. Examining expenditures on public education and the overall participation in the educational process is important in terms of quality of life.
20


METHODOLOGY
DATA GATHERING PHASE
After defining the areas of concern to be addressed, I began investigating each area to determine if relevant data was easily available for all towns and counties in the state. Gathering data on all incorporated places and counties appeared to be an enormous task. Fortunately there are sources of data for most of these areas which are available in Denver. Collection of data for incorporated places and counties was done for the following reasons. A county level analysis reflects conditions of the county, which includes incorporated and unincorporated areas. The results from a county level would be useful to a county planning department which directs its actions on a county wide basis.
Results from the incorporated place level provides a better indication of intra-county variation. Since incorporated places can establish official planning bodies, results at this level could be useful to these agencies.
In addition, since state economic aid to small towns, in the
*
form of CDBGs, is targeted at a regional level, the results will be aggregated to present a picture which shows how each planning region stands in comparison to other regions.
The single most plentiful
source of data used in this


study was Bureau o-f Census, data
-For 1980. It contains measures
for a variety of areas such as basic population figures, information of family characteristics, housing conditions, and various economic and educational measures.
In addition to the wide variety of data available from the Census, the Summary Tape File (STF-3A) contains data on all incorporated places in the state, in addition to all the counties. The Census publishes a variety of documents concerned with housing, economic and demographic characteristics, however the smallest unit, in terms of population, is usually not below 1,000 persons. In Colorado 60V. of all incorporated places are below 1,000 population. The only central source of information for these small towns is STF3-A.
Data for the area of concern addressing health was. obtained from the Colorado Department of Health. The annual VITAL STATISTICS REPORT details a number of health related topics, most of the data is aggregated, at the state, county and health planning region levels, and there is no information on towns under 2,500 population-
Citizen participation- was a- difficult area to obtain measures for., Participation can be defined in a number of ways and there are no central agencies which collect data which


directly measures the level of community participation in an area- The one source which was used in this study was published by the Elections and Licensing Division which included a very detailed account of voter participari on levels in the 1930 elections. Levels of voter apathy can give a general indication of interest in community affairs.
Public safety concerns are commonly measured by crime rates. The Colorado Bureau of Investigation annually publishes the UNIFORM CRIME REPORT which details the number of crimes in each county. Crime rates were computed for each county and used in the analysi s.
There were two areas of concern for which I was not able to obtain relevant information at the town or county level of analysis.. These omissions bring me to the next portion of this paper, the limitations of the data used in the study.
LIMITATIONS AND DATA CONCERNS
The amount of leisure time which people have is an element to consider in a quality of life study. However, there is no single source of data which could be used to measure this aspect of life.
23


The reader should keep in mind that as much as any study of indicators claims to be objective, there are many value
judgements that are made by the researcher- Decisions need to be made concerning which variables will be included in the analysis and which variables will be left out.
I
The majority of the data used in this analysis was 1980
Census data- The decennial census is the ma j or source of comprehensive information on the characteristics of the
population. For the years between the census there is no such information available. There may be very large changes in the population -from year to year,, yet these changes are not reflected in official statistics, other than at the time of the census.
The State attempts to fill this information void by making estimates of the population'for each county in Colorado. These
estimates are made for 19S5 through 2010. The figures also
include high, medium, and low estimates of county population-
The Census conducts special censuses for local communities and counties. These are done at the request and expense of the governmental entity and are1 usually done if it- is believed that an area has grown in population very quickly. The special count is done in order to justify*claims for an increased allocation of tax funds, or redistricting for legislative purposes.
24


Moriyama discusses the health area in INDICATORS OF SOCIAL CHANGE (1963) and points out that a problem exists relating to how to define "health". Most available data on health describes the negative aspects of health such as mortality and morbitity. Linder proposes an indicator of health status similar to the economic Gross National Product. This "gross national health deficit" would include the number of days of healthful living lost each year. Even if such an index was possible to construct, it would, still emphasize the negative aspects of health.
Citizen participation was another area of concern which encompasses a large' number of aspects. Participation in various community organizations such as those mentioned by Warren would be useful in constructing an index of participation. This type of data is very difficult if not impossible to obtain from a central agency. The major aspect of this area which is available and gives a measure of participation is voter participation rates-
25


The ABSTRACT OF VOTES CAST provides a detailed picture of
voter participation at the county level. Voter participation can be helpful in gauging the communitys general level of apathy toward government. The amount of political passivity can also indicate the extent of alienation felt in the community.
In order to objectively measure public safety, it was necessary to approach this area of concern in a manner similar to that taken with health. By emphasizing the negative side of "public safety", reported crimes, one can grasp the relative amount of alienation or social disruption in a community
The Colorado Bureau of Investigation publishes an annual report entitled CRIME IN COLORADO, which details among other items, reported crimes at the county level.
26


The term- "education" is commonly used but seldom de-fined very precisely. Duncan (Sheldon 1963) addresses the question o-f whether "the number o-f grades completed" is an adequate indicator o-f education. He states that education involves a command o-f a valuable body o-f skills and facts ". He admits that this is a fairly narrow definition of education but does note that this information can be obtained rather inexpensively.
Two major sources were consulted for information relating to education. They were the 1930 Census and the Colorado Department of Education annual report entitled COMPARATIVE SCHOOL DISTRICT FINANCIAL DATA. The Census provides information such as the number of persons enrolled in school, the number of unemployed persons who did not graduate from high school, and the number of school years completed for those 13 years and older.
The Department of Education report includes such information as the number of pupils per teacher in each school district. It also gives an indication of the economic status of the school district by way of the "assessed valuation per pupil" figure.
The selection of variables used in the analysis came from the sources mentioned earlier, the 1980 Census of Population, the Vital Statistics. Report, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Local Affairs. The variables were reviewed to create an initial set of indicators which reflected conditions of income, employment, health.
27


education, -family, housing,, and. social disorganization. Variables were chosen which reflected those areas of concern which policy makers and planners could study and possibly manipulate by way of new or modified policies.
28


FACTOR ANALYSIS
The -findings presented in this paper were derived from the application of factor analysis to data collected for county and incorporated places in Colorado. An understanding of these findings requires some conceptual understanding of factor analysis.
Factor analysis uncovers regularity and order in phenomena (Rummel 1972). It can take many measurements and observations and focuses on the patterns of occurrence, called dimensions. Factor analysis is grounded on the assumption that a large set of variables can be represented by a smaller number of categories based on the relationships between the variables (Mis 1975).
Factor analysis can be used for a variety of purposes. Two major uses for factor analysis are hypothesis testing and exploratory work (Rummel, 1972.). Factor analysis can be used to test the validity of a theoretical model. A theoretical model is developed and factor analysis is used to develop measures for some of the concepts included in the model. The measures can then be used to determine the strength of the theoretical model.
The second major purpose is concerned with an exploratory analysis where factor analysis is used to explore relationships between variables without the structure of a model.
2 9


Exploratory -factor analysis is based on the concept of exploring large sets of data in an effort to uncover previously unknown relationships among the variables. These new. relationships can then be used in building new or modified models. It should be noted however that even with a truely exploratory work, the researcher imposes a kind of framework upon the analysis when decisions are made as to which variables to collect and which variables would be included in the analysi s.
There are -five basic types of factor analytic techniques which may be utilized (Nie 1970). Alternative methods of rotation with respect to the factors is available. Rotation of the factors is done in order to observe a more meaningful patten of variable clustering. The factoring process may also be controlled through a number of statistical parameters. These aspects of factor analysis point to the fact that it is very method specific in that if one were to use another type of factoring technique a different result would be obtained.
The following analogy can be used to explain the overall procedure of factor analysis. If on a clear summers night we were to look into the star filled sky, we would see thousands of stars. The stars can be thought of as variables and when doing a factor analysis the basic .job is to determine groups of "stars"'1 or variables which seen to cluster together. After determining
3 0


these groups we can look closer at clusters to see which stars in each group are the brightest, which ones are of medium brightness, and which stars are dim or just barely visible- The clusters o-f stars are analagous to the "factors" and the degree of brightness is analagous to "factor loadings". The number of factors represent the number of dimensions or concepts for describing quality of Life- as determined by the variables. The loadings (the brightness of the stars) measure the degree to which the variables are involved in each factor dimension. High loading values indicate a strong relationship between the
variable and the hypothetical dimension or factor.


REVIEW OF QUALITY OF LIFE
FACTOR ANALYTIC STUDIES
Since the mid 1960's, there have been a number at factor analytic studies at various geographical levels, attempting to measure welfare. The following studies utilized factor analysis to construct composite indicators of various social conditions.
These studies are concerned with objective indicators as opposed to subjective indicators. Subjective indicators are concerned with opinions, perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs. Data for the development of subjective indicators are usually collected through survey questionnaires. Objective indicators are developed from statistics dealing with a variety of concerns which could include health, education, family characteristics, and economic conditions.
Flax- (1973) examined two types of indicator reports, intra-city and inter-city reports. Intra-city reports are those which describe one city. Inter-city reports are those which describe and compare several jurisdictions. Flax listed 25 inter-city reports done by various agencies between 1970 and 1977. The subject areas of these reports included:
3 2


1. Economy
2. Welfare
3. Education
4. Health
5. Housing
6. Crime
7- Transportation 3. Demography 9. Participatipn 10. Government services
12. Government budgets
13. Environment
14. Racial factors
A number of methods of cR n ai 1 y s i were used. Four studies
utilised factor analysis and i nc 1 Lided the subject areas of
income, comsumer activities, health (including mental health), and education.
Berry <1965) constructed three composite indicators from 47 measures of housing, income, and farm capital for counties and municipalities in Ontario. These indicators included rural farm poverty, rural nonfarm poverty, and social disadvantage.
Smith (1973) described three composite indicators or measures for 48 states using 47 variables from the U.3. Census and other sources. The composite indicators included socio-economic well-being, social pathology, and mental health.
In 1979, Ross et. al. described four dimensions of life for 3,097 counties in the- United States. From a set of 12 variables the dimensions of life were described in. terms of socioeconomic status, health, family status, and alienation.
Giampaglia and Young (1980) studied 20 Italian regions
33


using 16 census type variables to describe the -following measures of well-being; social affluence, family oriented life style, and basic consumption.
Munson (1963) constructed a community efficiency index for all counties in Ohio. He identified eight leading factors; urbanism, level of living, population growth, agricultural productivity, social control, taxable wealth and insured labor f or c e.
Smith (1965) states that the best known factor analytical study of American cities is that of Hadden and Borgatta. In 1965 they measured 650 cities with populations over 25,000. Their leading factors included socio-economic status, non-white population and age composition.
The earliest quality of life study was that done by Thorndike (1939). He studied 310 cities of over 30,000 population in order to describe and explain differences between cities in the area of quality of life. Thorndike used statistical analysis and subjective weighting of his variables to develop "Gscores" for his sample of cities.
Shen (1931) studied 45 Japanese prefecture using 14 census type variables.. She described four measures of well being; social affluence,, social pathology, and rural quality of life.
Young (1932) used 15 census type variables pertaining to 52 New York counties and described four dimensions of well being
34


and aff1 u'encs-
which included, health, crime, inequality,
What should be noted is that what comes out, in terms of results and the various dimensions of well-being, is determined by what goes in, in terms of data. Therefore the limiting factor in this type of research is the available data. It has been
noted earlier in this paper that information relating to small towns in Colorado is lacking.
INTERPRETATION OF THE FACTOR ANALYSIS
Table 1 displays the format of a rotated factor matrix. The columns define factors or dimensions and the rows refer to variables. The intersection of a row with a column represents the loading for that particular variable on the factor at the top of the column.
35


TABLE 1
VARIMAX ROTATED FACTOR MATRIX
Variables Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3
Median family income .69 -. 43
Median years of education .77 -.39 -. 09
Percent of male householders not in poverty .73 -. 10 . 22
Suicide rates -.06 -.01 . 76
Heart disease rates -.21 . 93 . 17
Cancer rates -.09 .36 -. 14
Percent not voting 1980 -25 -.03 KT'-t uJ^.
Physicians per 1000 pop. -.24 . 52 -.45
Percent of housing units with complete plumbing .79 . 10 -. 01
Percent of the population above 65 years -.59 .68 . 08
Crime rates .53 -.31 60
Each factor was examined and the variables which loaded high (above .50) contributed to the labeling of the factors. Factor 1 was characterized by high loading variables such as median family income,, years of education, percentage of housing units with complete plumbing, and crime rates. These
36


variables describe an overall economic picture of a locality and coupled with the educational attainment helped to label this factor the socio-economic dimension.
Factor 2 was characterized by having high loading variables which described various aspects of health. Cancer rates, heart disease rates, and physicians per 1000 population helped to label this factor the health dimension.
The third factor was characterized by variables such as crime rates, suicide rates, and voting participation rates. These variables suggest that this factor measures general social disorganization. It was for this reason that this factor was labeled alienation.
3 7


REGIONAL GEOGRAPHIC PATTERNS OF WELL-BEING IN COLORADO


SOCIO-ECONOMIC DIMENSION
The geographic patterns of the socio-economic dimension are presented in Figures 1 3. The figures show the counties which are shaded according to which percentile rank they can be -found. Counties in the 30 100 percentile rank scored better than at least 30 percent of the counties in the state. Counties in the 60 7? group scored better than at least 60 percent of the counties in the state.
Counties with high .levels of socio-economic well being concentrated around the Denver rnetro area (Boulder, Gilpin, Clear Creek, Jefferson, Douglas, and Arapahoe) and the central mountain ski counties of Eagle, Pitkin, Lake, Summitt, and Routt. Moffat and Rio Blanco counties also fell into the top 13 counties. This could be explained by the fact that the oil shale development was in high gear in the 197980 period and updated figures could show a decline in this dimension for these two counties. Counties located in Front Range SMSA"s all fell in the top 60 percentile except for Teller County.
Two other noticabl'e clusters are evident. The first contained a group of west slope counties (San Miguel, Ouray,, Dolores, San Juan, Montezuma, and La Plata) which ranked in the
38


40-60 prcenti1e.The second cluster or band was noticed stretching from Phillips County in the northeast corner of the state down to Baca County and west through Archuleta County. These counties were in the lowest quintile.
HEALTH DIMENSION
Geographic patterrii'o+ the health dimension were similar to those patterns seen in the economic dimension, however some variations are noteworthy.
The counties exhibiting high scores on the health dimension were adjacent to the Denver area (Jefferson and Douglas) and in the mountain ski counties of Summitt, Eagle, Pitkin, and Routt.
An additional cluster of "healthy" counties were noticed. The main difference between this group and the counties mentioned above is that the second cluster, which included San Miguel, San Juan, and Dolores counties,, is not associated with the highest scores in the socio-economic dimension.
There were ten counties which were in the lowest quintile in both health and socio-economic dimensions. This group included Phillips, Crowley,. Otero,. Prowers', Sac a, Huerfano, Las Animas, Saguache, Rio Grande and Delta counties. Again, these represent a predominantly agricultural, eastern plains and southern counties.
39


ALIENATION DIMENSION
The geographic pattern associated with the alienation dimension yielded few clusters o-f counties exhibiting low levels o-f social alienation. The counties scoring in the top quintile were scattered across the- state from Moffat to Prowers to Ouray to Sedgwick County.
Clusters ot counties exhibiting high levels of social alienation were seen in the south central and eastern plains areas with two counties ,Crowley and Las Animas falling into the lowest quintile in all three dimensions.
In terms of State Planning Regions, Regions 1,5,6,7,3 (see map on next page) are lagging behind the rest of the state with respect to the three dimensions described above. These regions comprise most of the eastern plains and south to south central regions.
The regions which seem to be the strongest with respect to these dimensions include the Denver metro area specifically the suburban counties of Region 3, and the central mountain ski regions 4 and 12.
40


INCORPORATED PLACE SUMMARY
RESIGN 1 Towns which ranked highest on the socio-economic dimension were Sterling and Merino. Fort Morgan, Juiesberg, and Log Lane Village also were highly ranked relative to other towns in the region. F'aoli in Phillips County and Eckely in Yuma County were ranked lowest in the region.
REGION 2 Fort Collins and Estes Park were the highest ranking towns in Region 2. Severance and Garden City ranked lowest percentile group.
REGION 3 The DenverBoulder SMSA contained the top ranked incorporated place in the state. Cherry Hills Village was
followed by Bow Mar and Greenwood Village. Douglas County which ranked highest of the 63 counties contains the lowest ranking town in the region. Larkspur. This points out that practically all of the socio-economic wealth is in the unincorporated portion of the county.
REGION 4 Woodland Park and Green Mountain Falls ranked high in this region.. Victor, in Teller County and Ramah in El Paso County were ranked lowest regionally.
REGION 5 Region 5 which had 46% of its towns above the state average was led by Elizabeth and Bethune. Siebert, located in Kit Carson County was ranked lowest.
REGION 6 - Region 6 had only 23% of its towns above the
4 1


state average in the socio-sconomi c dimension. Lamar, L aJunta,
Vi las, 3pr i ngf ield, Swink, and Holly scored above the average
while eight towns (Two Buttes, Pritchett, Sugar City , 01 n ey
Springs, Crowley, Manzanola, and Hartman scored 10% below the state average.
REGION 7 Pueblo and Rye were the only towns ranking above the state average in this region. Starkville and Kim, both in Las Animas County ranked lowest for the region.
REGION 3 Alamosa East, Alamosa and Hooper ranked equal to or higher than the state average. Five towns, Romeo, Sanford, Antoni to, San Luis and Center scored more than 10% below the average.
REGION ? Within Region 9, 50% of the incorporated places ranked above the state average with Durango ranking the highest and Rico scoring the lowest.
REGION 10 Mount Crested Butte, Crested Butte, Gunnison and Telluride- scored well in this region. Sawpit, Pitkin and Ophir ranked lowest in the region.
REGION 11 All 17 towns in Region 11 scored equal to or above the state average. Glenwood Springs, Carbondals, Rangeley and Meeker were the highest ranking twons. Fruita was lowest with a ranking equal to the- state average.
REGION 12 This region was the highest ranking region in the state. It contains four towns in the 30 100 percentile-


bracket. These River. Red average.
REGION 13 were Leadvilie Coal Creek all
include Vail, Snowmass Village, Aspen and Blue Cli-f-f was the only town -falling under the state
- The top two incorporated places in this region and Buena Vista. Rockvale, Prospect Heights and in Fremont County ranked lowest.
43


SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The specific goal of this thesis was to construct composite indicators of well-being for each county and incorporated place in Colorado. These indicators were developed through the use of factor analytic techniques. The place level was chosen because it is the smallest organized unit which can establish official planning functions. It was also chosen because intracounty variations among dimensions would be easier to observe.
Review of relevant literature uncovered a large body of research addressing the concepts of well-being, social indicators, and factor analysis,, Work by Warren,, Gross, and Sheldon were reviewed in order to develop a framework which was used during the data gathering phase of the project. The main sources of data used in this study were the 1980 Census,. Colorado Vital Statistics Reports, Colorado Bureau of Investigation Crime Reports, the 1980 Voter Abstract,, Characteristics of Physicians for Colorado, and Comparative School District Financial Data.
Data from these sources were gathered and variables were chosen which were relevant to planning in general and addressed the areas of interest in the study of well-being. Three factors or dimensions of life were identified. These included (1)sacio-economic (2)health and <3> alienation. Factor scores
44


were computed and then scaled on a common index in order to make interpretation easier.
Factor analysis can be used in studies o-f well-being as well as others which have relevance to planning. Schultz (1980) used factor analysis to combine community development and social science strategies. Through a process of group participation, survey development and factor analysis of the survey results, he was able to provide elected officials with a cl ear picture of what areas the local residents were concerned with and the relative importance of each area.
Rural communities may; be viewed as falling into one of three general categories. The first category, endowed communities, have comparative advantages such as community leadership which can gather support for industrial development efforts, adequate infrastructure,, natural resources, positive transportation factors or are relatively close to urban centers.. Even though there are fewer outside firms than there are endowed communities, these towns do. have the potential for attracting firms due to their comparative advantages.
The second general type of community is not endowed with locational or other advantages and are far greater in numbers than the endowed communities. These are the types of
45


communities which most new businesses start from local initiative and where inadequate infrastructure or location factors do not figure greatly in the formation of the new enterpr i se-
The third type of rural community can be described as the purely agricultural community. These towns lack most of the endowments mentioned above and on their own will have a difficult time improving their socio-economic status. Although agriculture is one of the most important parts of Colorado's economy, operating costs continue to increase while farm incomes have failed to keep pace-. Improvements may be brought about by restructuring of farms into more efficient units and training workers for employment in other sectors and possibly other places. The salvation of most of these areas seems to lie in the intervention of outside governmental entities such as state or federal agencies rather than intervention from an outside firm.
In the area of state intervention, increased support should be given in the development of new or expanded markets for those agricultural products presently grown in the counties which ranked low in. the socio-economic dimension. Water resource developments for agriculture are needed particularly in parts of-Regions 1,2,5,6,8,9, and 10. Adult education should be emphasised and strongly supported in these regions. Vo-tech programs- in existing institutions such as Otero Junior College,,
46


Lamar Community College, Trinidad Junior College and the Can Juan Basin Area VoTech school, should be expanded.
The health dimension gave an indication as to areas at the state where health care should be examined in closer detail. These areas include parts o-f Regions 1,5 and 6. It also includes all o-f Region 7 and most o-f Region 8..
The elderly poor in rural areas outside the Front Range are a major group o-f citizens who are not well served by present health care systems. The major reasons include high costs and lack o-f access. Access to doctors is particularly a problem in the -following counties where the ratio of persons per doctor exceeds 2000 or where there is no doctor in the county;
Phi 11 ips Prowers San Juan Yuma Lincoln Wei d
Washi ngton Costi11a Elbert
Crawley Kit Carson Morgan Dolores.
Rio Grande Saguache Conej os Ki owa Cheyenne
(Two counties, Las Animas and Moffatt, decreased their persons/MD ratio by close to 507. between 1975 and 1980.)
In light of the access and cost barriers, more small rural community clinics should be established, especially in the
southern and southeastern portions of the state.
These could be


staffed- by physicians and nurses who. could rotate from county to county. Improved transportation networks for emergencies should also be addressed in these areas.
The final dimension, alienation, gives a general overview of the cohesiveness of community life. The indicators used in the analysis of alienation, reflect to varying degrees social disorganization. Voter apathy is admitingly a crude measure of participation however it does shed some light on a populations attitude towards government. Crime rates are a fairly direct measure of social disruption. The portion of crimes committed by youths (this statistic was not available for this study) could yield insights to the socio-sconomic dimension as it related to educational, and economic opportunities in an area.
The above conclusions and broad recommendations were derived from the results of the factor analysis and from personal observations of the "state of the state". A few of the suggestions offered may seem obvious, however, they pinpoint specific regions and counties in the state which may need assistances Also,, the socio-economic index for incorporated places indicates where in each county the assistance may be well worth targeting.
48


In the process of working on this project, it became evident that analysis on a micro-level (analyzing a few towns instead of nearly 300) with very specific objective information coupled with subjective measures could yield a fairly complete picture of the towns under study. Examples of- this future work include examining each broad index presented in this paper in the context of a single county or a small sample of towns in order to determine a specific socio-economic or health related quality of life measure. In addition, working on a small scale, one could elicit input and feedback from residents of the areas which may help in determining what to measure and how to measure it.. Also a study which could employ the same types of data and analysis could examine communities along a temporal dimension to determine areas where the "quality of life" is. improving or declining. This- type of study could also incorporate a type of growth index using similar types of data and it would be interesting to see what type of correlation might exist between quality of life and growth, both: in objective and subjective terms.
Irr some- ways, this paper scratches the surface of the quality of life question,, but it also opens up possible
t
approaches which can- be- uti1ized which would give one a firm overall sense- of how., an area is performing not only economically but also in other areas such as health.
49


Bauer, R. ed., SOCIAL INDICATORS. M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1966.
Berry, B., "Identification of Declining regions:An Empirical Study of the Dimensions of Rural Poverty," AREAS OF ECONOMIC STRESS IN CANADA, Queens University Press, Kingston,
Ontario, pp.22-66, 1965.
Campbell, A., THE HUMAN MEANING OF SOCIAL CHANGE. Russell Sage, New York, 1972, p. 441.
Campbell, A., THE SENSE OF WELL-BEING IN AMERICA. McGraw-Hill, New York,1981.
Carley, M., SOCIAL MEASUREMENT AND SOCIAL INDICATORS. George Allen and Unwin, London, 1969.
Flax, M.J., SURVEY OF URBAN SOCIAL INDICATOR DATA. The Urban Institute, New York, 1978.
Giampaglia, G. and Young, F., "The Structural Context of Family Welfare in the Regions of Italy," SOCIAL INDICATORS RESEARCH 7, 1980, pp.443-462.
Gross, B., THE STATE OF THE NATION. Tavistock Publications, London, 1966.
Guttman, L., Social Problem Indicators," ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE 393, pp.40-46.
Kamray, N. and Christakis, A., Social Indicators in Perspective," SOCIO-ECONOMIC PLANNING SCIENCES 4, 1970, pp.
207-216.
Lear, J., "Where is Society Going? The Search for Landmarks," SATURDAY REVIEW, April 15, 1972, p.36.
Munson, B., CHANGING COMMUNITY DIMENSIONS: THE INTERRELATIONSHIP OF SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC VARIABLES. College of Administrative Science, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 1968.
Nie, N. ed., SPSS:STATISTICAL PACKAGE FOR THE SOCIAL SCIENCES. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1975.
50


deNue-f vi lie, J., SOCIAL INDICATORS AND PUBLIC POLICY. Elsiever, New York, 1975.
Office of Management and Budget, SOCIAL INDICATORS, 1973. USGPO, Washington D.C., 1973.
Parsons, T., THE SOCIAL SYSTEM. Free Press, Glencoe,
111i noi s, 1951.
Rummel, R.J., THE DIMENSIONS OF NATIONS. Russell Sage, New York, 1972.
Sheldon, E.B. and Moore, W.E. eds., INDICATORS OF SOCIAL CHANGE. Russell Sage, New York, 1968.
Smith, D., THE GEOGRAPHY OF SOCIAL WELL-BEING. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1973.
Thorndike, E., YOUR CITY. Harcourt, Brace, and Company, New York, 1939.
U.S. Department of Health Education and Welfare, TOWARD A SOCIAL REPORT. USGPO, Washington D.C., 1969.
Warren, R., THE COMMUNITY IN AMERICA. Rand McNally, Chicago, 1978.
Young, F., "Social Indicators and Social Structure," COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY, January 11, 1983, p.22.
51


SOCIO-ECONOMIC DIMENSION
SEDGWICK
IOC AN
MOFFAT
HOUTT
JACKSON
MORGAN
GRAND
BOUlD£R
RIO BLANCO
OtNVER
ADAMS
WASHINGTON
clear creek
ARAPAHOE
EAGLE
JEFFER SON ^
GARFIELD
ELBERT
^ DOUGLAS
PARK
MESA
UNCOIN
TELLER
DELTA
CHEYENNE
EL PASO
GUNNISON
CHAFFEE;
FREMONT
KIOWA
MONTROSE
CROWLEY
PUEBLO
OURAY
SAGUACHE
CUSTER
SAN MIGUEL
HINSDALE
OTERO
DOLORES
HUERFANO
RIO GRANDE
ALAMOS.
MONTEZUMA^
LAS ANIMAS
ARCHULETA
CONEJOS
COSTILLA
6 P
BENT
C\J
1C
FIGURE


i
HEALTH DIMENSION
awicK |
PERCENTILE rank
CO
10
FIGURE


ALIENA NUN DIMtNSIUN
PERCENTILE rank
to
eo
FIGURE


h
SOCIO-ECONOMIC
2 0
FOR 1 0
,C SPRINGS
lakewood; J
ARVADA* .AURORA T COLLINS * 'WESTMINSTER
>20
DENVER.
PUEBLO,
----------1-
- 1 0
ORIGIN EQUALS STATE AVERAGE
BOULDER
GREELEY
1 0
-i 2 0
HEALTH


The following tables according to percenti
show each incorporated place in Colorado le ranking in the socio-economic dimension.


INCORPORATED PLACES: SO
100 PERCENTILE RANK
CNTY PLCE
ADAMS NORTHGLENN STRASBURG WESTMINSTER
ARAPAHOE AURORA BOW MAR CASTLEWODD CHERRY HILLS VILLAGE COLUMBINE VALLEY GLENDALE GREENWOOD VI L.L.AGE LI TTL.ETQN SOUTHGL.ENN (CDP)
BOULDER BOULDER BROOMFIELD GUNBARREL(CDP) JAMESTOWN LOU 15VI L..L.E
CLEAR CREEK EMPIRE GEORGETOWN SILVER PLUME
DOUGLAS EAGLE CASTLE ROCK AVON BASALT EAGLE VAIL
EL PASO AIR FORCE ACADEMY BLACK FOREST MONUMENT WOODMOOR (CDP)
BARFIELD CARBONDALE GLENWOOD SPRINGS
GILPIN GRAND CENTRAL CITY FRASER KREMML. ING WINTER PARK
GUNNISON CRESTED BtJTTE GUNNISON MOUNT CRESTED BUTTE
JEFFERSON APPLEWOOD ARVADA COLUMBINE EVERGREEN GOLDEN KEN CARYL(CDP) LAKEWOOD MORRISON


I INCORPORATED PLACES
SO
100 PERCENTILE RANI
CNTY PLCE
KIT CARSON LAKE LARIMER WHEAT RIDGE BETHUNE LEADVILLE NORTH < CDP) ESTES PARK FORT COLLINS
PITKIN ASPEN SNOWMASS VILLAGE
RIO BLANCO MEEKER RANGLEY
ROLJTT HAYDEN STEAMBOAT SPRINGS
SAN MISUEL SUMMITT TELLURIDE BLUE RIVER BRECKINRIDGE DILLON FRISCO SILVERTHORNE


INCORPORATED PLACES: 60
79 PERCENTILE RANI
CNTY PLCE
ADAMS SHERRELWOOD (CDP) THORTON WEL.BY (CDP) WESTMINSTER EAST (CDP)
ARAPAHOE BOULDER ENGLEWOOD LAFAYETTE LONGMONT LYONS NEDERLAND SUPERIOR
CHAFFEE CLEAR CREEK DENVER DOLORES EAGLE BUENA VISTA IDAHO SPRINGS DENVER DOVE CREEK GYPSUM MIN TURN
EL PASO CIMARRON HILLS COLORADO SPRINGS GREEN MOUNTAIN FALLS MANITOU SPRINGS PALMER LAKE SECURITY--WIDEFI ELD (CDP)
ELBERT GARFIELD ELIZABETH NEW CASTLE RIFLE
GILPIN GRAND BLACK HAWK GRANBY GRAND LAKE HOT SULPHUR SPRINGS
HINSDALE JEFFERSON LA PLATA LAKE CITY MOUNTAIN VIEW BAYFIELD DURANGO
LAKE LARIMER LEADVILLE LOVELAND TINMATH
MESA CLIFTON DE DEQUE ORCHARD MESA. (CDP)
MINERAL MOFFATT MONTEZUMA MONTROSE OURAY PARK ROIJTT CREEDE CRAIG CORTEZ NUCLA OURAY FAIRPLAY YAMPA


INCORPORATED PLACES: 60
CNTY
SAN JUAN SAN MIGUEL TELLER WELD
- 79 PERCENTILE RANK PLCE
SILVERTON
NORWOOD
WOODLAND PARK
EATON
GREELEY
LA SALLE
MEAD
RAYMER


INCORPORATED PLACES: 40
59 PERCENTILE RANI
CNTY PLCE
ADAMS BENNETT BRIGHTON FEDERAL HEIGHTS
ALAMOSA ALAMOSA EAST HOOPER
ARAPAHOE DEER TRAIL SHERIDAN
BACA SPRINGFIELD VI LAS
CHAFFEE PONCHA SPRINGS SALIDA
DELTA HOTCHKISS PAQNIA
EL PASO CALHAN FOUNTAIN CITY
FREMONT CANON CITY FLORENCE LINCOLN PARK (CDP)
GARFIELD GRAND VALLEY SILT
JACKSON JEFFERSON KIT CARSON WALDEN EDGEWATER BURLINGTON FLAGLER STRATTON
EARIMER BERTHOUD WELLINGTON
LINCOLN ARRIBA LI MON
LOGAN FLEMING MERINO PEETZ STERLING
MESA COLLBRAN FRUITA GRAND JUNCTION PALISADE
MOFFATT MONTROSE DINOSAUR MONTROSE NATURITA
MORGAN BRUSH


INCORPORATED PLACE'S: 40
59 PERCENTILE RAMI
CNTY PLCE
OTERO FORT MORGAN LOG LANE VILLAGE L.A JUNTA SWl'NK
OURAY PHILLIPS RIDGWAY HA>'TUN HOLYOKE
PROWERS HOLLY LAMAR
PUEBLO PUEBLO RYE
ROUTT SEDGWICK WASHINGTON WELD OAK CREEK JULESBERG AKRON DACONO ERIE EVANS FIRESTONE GILCREST JOHNSTOWN KERSEY LOCHBUIE PLATTEV1LLE ROSEDALE WINDSOR PARK
YUMA WRAY


INCORPORATED PLACESs 20 39 PERCENT ILb RANI
CNTY PLCE
ADAMS COMMERCE CITY DERBY
ALAMOSA BENT CHEYENNE CROWLEY CUSTER ALAMOSA LAS ANIMAS CHEYENNE WELLS ORDWAY SILVER CLIFF WESTCLIFFE
DELTA DELTA ORCHARD CITY
EAGLE EL PASO RED CLIFF FORT CARSON STRATMOOR (CDP)
ELBERT FREMONT HUERFANO KIOWA KIOWA BROOKSIDE LA VETA EADS HASWELL
KIT CARSON LA PLATA LAS ANIMAS VON A IGNACIO BRANSON COKEDALE TRINIDAD
LINCOLN GENOA HUGO
LOGAN CROOK I LIFE
MONTEZUMA DOLORES MANGOS
MONTROSE MORGAN OLATHE HILROSE WIGGINS
OTERO CHERAW FOWLER NORTH LA JUNTA (CDP)
PROWERS PUEBLO SAGUACHE SEDGWICK WILEY BOONE SAGUACHE OVID
V SEDGWI Cl<
WASHINGTON WELD OTIS AULT FORT LUPTON


INCORPORA TED PLAGES
CNTY
: EX* -- SV h'tKLtN I l L-fc. KHNN
F'LCE
HUDSON KEENESBURG
YUMA
YUMA


O 1 V I'"' t K U fc M i l L... fc K HIM f:.
INCUHPUKA I ED PLACES :
CN'T'Y F'LCE
ARCHULETA BACA PAGOSA SPRINGS CAMPD PRITCHETT TWO BUTTES
BOULDER CHEYENNE CONEJOS WARD KIT CARSON ANTONITO LA JARA MANASSA ROMEO SANFORD
COSTILLA BLANCA SAN LUIS
CROWLEY CROWLEY OLNEY SPRINGS SUGAR CITY
DELTA CEDAREDGE CRAWFORD
DOLORES DOUGLAS EL PASO FREMONT RICO LARKSPUR RAMAH COAL CREEK PROSPECT HEIGHTS ROCKVALE WI LL IAMSBIJRG
GUNNISON MARBLE PITKIN
HUERFANO KIOWA KIT CARSON LAS ANIMAS WALSENBURG SHERIDAN LAKE SIEBERT AGUILAR KIM STARKVILLE
OTERO MANZANOLA ROCKY FORD
PARK PHILLIPS PROWERS ALMA F'AOLI GRANADA HARTMAN
RIO GRANDE SAGUACHE DEI... NORTE CENTER CRESTONE MOFFAT
SAN MIGUEL OPHIR


INCORPORATED CM TV
TELLER
WELD
PLACES: 0 -19 PERCENTILE RANK F'LCE
SAWPIT
VICTOR FREDERICK GARDEN CITY GROVER MILLIKEN SEVERANCE
YUMA
ECKLEY