Attribute-Specific Disparities in Functional Limitation, 2009

	Income		Education
State	Disparity	Contribution (%)	Disparity	Contribution (%)
Alabama	0.062	25.01	0.064	25.95
Alaska	0.024	16.78	0.027	19.20
Arizona	0.031	27.87	0.025	22.79
Arkansas	0.061	24.20	0.059	23.73
California	0.032	33.52	0.028	29.03
Colorado	0.029	25.63	0.023	20.35
Connecticut	0.031	27.75	0.035	31.24
DC	0.056	25.97	0.047	21.87
Delaware	0.037	21.84	0.036	21.30
Florida	0.035	26.41	0.033	24.93
Georgia	0.043	29.76	0.043	30.07
Hawaii	0.024	28.20	0.025	29.30
Idaho	0.041	19.93	0.026	12.86
Illinois	0.036	31.39	0.030	26.28
Indiana	0.047	28.89	0.041	25.01
Iowa	0.039	29.46	0.029	22.37
Kansas	0.049	36.43	0.032	23.93
Kentucky	0.070	22.63	0.073	23.41
Louisiana	0.051	30.67	0.052	31.16
Maine	0.059	44.65	0.058	43.80
Maryland	0.027	25.55	0.033	31.12
Massachusetts	0.039	32.12	0.041	33.67
Michigan	0.047	25.24	0.043	23.19
Minnesota	0.036	44.30	0.029	34.97
Mississippi	0.069	28.37	0.060	24.54
Missouri	0.055	24.74	0.048	21.69
Montana	0.037	39.99	0.032	33.88
Nebraska	0.041	26.45	0.025	16.38
Nevada	0.022	24.92	0.017	19.08
New Hampshire	0.029	15.21	0.037	19.15
New Jersey	0.027	29.36	0.031	34.20
New Mexico	0.043	21.25	0.041	20.23
New York	0.040	34.71	0.036	31.41
North Carolina	0.051	28.92	0.045	25.46
North Dakota	0.035	19.37	0.033	18.58
Ohio	0.053	28.20	0.049	26.07
Oklahoma	0.060	30.71	0.046	23.27
Oregon	0.038	28.74	0.029	21.76
Pennsylvania	0.049	35.77	0.047	34.80
Rhode Island	0.049	38.61	0.048	38.41
South Carolina	0.052	23.06	0.051	22.82
South Dakota	0.042	25.23	0.022	13.15
Tennessee	0.063	28.29	0.060	26.86
Texas	0.042	28.44	0.037	24.93
Utah	0.029	30.07	0.023	23.61
Vermont	0.048	51.25	0.039	41.61
Virginia	0.039	31.04	0.043	34.78
Washington	0.035	31.85	0.031	28.71
West Virginia	0.077	23.21	0.072	21.66
Wisconsin	0.037	34.74	0.033	30.94
Wyoming	0.034	45.77	0.030	40.26

	Sex		Race/Ethnicity
State	Disparity	Contribution (%)	Disparity	Contribution (%)
Alabama	0.002	0.77	0.119	48.26
Alaska	0.009	6.59	0.081	57.42
Arizona	0.002	1.78	0.053	47.57
Arkansas	0.004	1.72	0.126	50.35
California	0.000	0.00	0.036	37.46
Colorado	0.004	3.92	0.057	50.11
Connecticut	0.004	3.71	0.042	37.30
DC	0.012	5.49	0.100	46.67
Delaware	0.003	1.66	0.094	55.21
Florida	0.002	1.82	0.062	46.83
Georgia	0.002	1.45	0.056	38.72
Hawaii	0.008	9.28	0.028	33.21
Idaho	0.018	8.91	0.120	58.30
Illinois	0.004	3.58	0.045	38.75
Indiana	0.002	1.48	0.073	44.62
Iowa	0.006	4.79	0.057	43.37
Kansas	0.003	2.56	0.049	37.09
Kentucky	0.003	1.08	0.165	52.89
Louisiana	0.003	1.89	0.061	36.29
Maine*	0.012	8.94	0.003	2.60
Maryland	0.005	4.50	0.041	38.83
Massachusetts	0.002	1.95	0.039	32.27
Michigan	0.004	2.08	0.092	49.48
Minnesota	0.008	9.55	0.009	11.18
Mississippi	0.003	1.16	0.112	45.93
Missouri	0.002	1.07	0.117	52.49
Montana*	0.020	21.54	0.004	4.59
Nebraska	0.007	4.44	0.081	52.73
Nevada	0.000	0.00	0.050	55.99
New Hampshire	0.002	1.27	0.123	64.37
New Jersey	0.003	3.41	0.030	33.03
New Mexico	0.013	6.43	0.106	52.09
New York	0.000	0.00	0.039	33.88
North Carolina	0.001	0.54	0.080	45.08
North Dakota*	0.020	11.13	0.092	50.92
Ohio	0.002	1.01	0.085	44.72
Oklahoma	0.006	3.18	0.084	42.84
Oregon	0.004	2.95	0.062	46.55
Pennsylvania	0.000	0.00	0.040	29.44
Rhode Island	0.001	0.84	0.028	22.15
South Carolina	0.006	2.53	0.115	51.58
South Dakota*	0.009	5.60	0.092	56.02
Tennessee	0.002	1.07	0.097	43.78
Texas	0.000	0.33	0.068	46.29
Utah	0.001	1.02	0.044	45.30
Vermont*	0.005	5.15	0.002	1.99
Virginia	0.001	1.15	0.041	33.04
Washington	0.005	4.98	0.037	34.46
West Virginia	0.012	3.77	0.170	51.37
Wisconsin	0.003	2.76	0.034	31.56
Wyoming*	0.004	4.76	0.007	9.21

Notes: 1. “No functional limitation” is defined as not having a limitation in any of the following six areas: hearing, vision, cognition, ambulation, self-care, and independent living.

2. For example, the income-specific disparity of 0.034 in Wyoming suggests that in order to eliminate education-specific disparity, 3.4% more people in Wyoming must become free of functional limitation, and they must come from lower-income groups.

3. For example, in Wyoming the attribute contribution of income, 45.77%, means that 45.77% of the overall disparity comes from income-specific disparity.

4. Due to the small numbers (cell counts less than 50), combined groups, rather than a single group, are used as the reference in the calculation of race/ethnicity–specific disparity in the six states marked with an asterisk.

5. All analyses are weighted, and functional limitation is age standardized using the U.S. 2000 standard population.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau n.d.a.