Rosewood Neighborhood Community Health Assessment

Date: November 20, 2013

Group Members: April Richard, Yashonda Mobley, Elizabeth Qua Lynch, Eliana Ribarsch,
Prasamsa Sharma

Socio-Demographic Profile:
Race and Ethnicity
Race can be used as an indicator of health. Research has been conducted that shows health
disparities exist between whites and other racial groups. Health outcomes for many health conditions
are generally poorer for minorities. Minority groups also tend to die at younger ages leading to higher
amounts of years of potential life lost (YPLL). The Rosewood community is part of census tract 103.
According to the 2010 census data, compared to all of Guilford County this tract has a much lower
percentage of whites, 37.5 for the census tract and 57.0 for the county. Likewise, the percentage of
whites in Guilford County is lower than the state of North Carolina percentage of 68.5. Of the 2,246
people that comprise the total population of the tract, 345 identified themself as Vietnamese; that is
14.2% of the population. This is much higher than the Guilford County percent of 1.2, and even more so
than the 0.3% for the state. Census tract 103 has a large amount of racial diversity. Since the tract
contains a large number of minority residents, one would expect that there may be poorer health
outcomes than compared to counties with a majority of white residents. This could be due to a lack of
insurance, lack of quality healthcare providers in the area, language barriers, and other barriers that
prevent people from accessing needed medical care and treatment.

Table 1
Race and Ethnicity

Census Tract 103

Number
Percent
867
37.5

Guilford County
Number
Percent
278,525
57.0

White
Black or African
American
886
36.5
158,899
American Indian or
Alaska Native
25
1.0
2,594
Asian
397
16.4
19,176
Vietnamese
345
14.2
5,658
Native Hawaiian and
Other Pacific Islander
1
0.0
235
Some Other Race
165
6.8
17,675
Two or More Races
85
3.5
11,302
Hispanic or Latino
(of any race)
304
12.5
34,826
Total*
2,246
100.0
488,406
U.S. Census Bureau; Census 2010, Summary File 1, DP1

North Carolina
Number
Percent
6,528,950 68.5

32.5

2,048,628

21.5

0.5
3.9
1.2

122,110
208,962
27,304

1.3
2.2
0.3

0.0
3.6
2.3

6,604
414,030
206,199

0.1
4.3
2.2

7.1
100.0

800,120
9,535,483

8.4
100.0

*In order to calculate the correct total population, do not add separate totals for Vietnamese or
Hispanic

Age
Age is another characteristic that can be used as a health indicator. The age composition of a
community can give those interested in the health of the community an idea of which health issues they
should expect to come across. If there is a high percentage of elderly people present in the community,
one would expect a higher prevalence of chronic diseases such as heart disease, arthritis, and dementia
than if the majority of the community was children and young adults. The percentage of the population
with a reported age under 20 was about the same for census tract 103, Guilford County, and the state of
North Carolina. The percentage of people age 20-29 for the census tract was lower than that reported
for the county and the state. The percentage of people age 60-69 for the census tract was 7.1 which
was lower than the county percentage of 9.2 and the state percentage of 9.8. However, the percentage

of adults with a reported age of 70 or higher was 11.8 for the census tract. This was greater than the
8.5% reported for Guilford County and 8.6% reported for North Carolina. The community appears to
have better health outcomes once advanced years of age are reached. It may benefit if more services
were provided for the elderly.
Table 2
Age

Census Tract 103

Guilford County
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
Under 5
178
7.3
30,639
6.3
5-14
339
14
64,035
13.1
15-19
195
8
37,290
7.6
20-29
305
12.6
72,802
14.9
30-39
303
12.5
63,999
13.1
40-49
344
14.2
69,522
14.2
50-59
305
12.6
63,799
13
60-69
171
7.1
44,815
9.2
70 and over
286
11.8
41,505
8.5
Total
2,426
100.0
488,406
100.0
U.S. Census Bureau; Census 2010, Summary File 1, DP1

North Carolina
Number
Percent
632,040
6.6
1,267,049 13.3
659,591
6.9
1,288,609 13.5
1,279,400 13.4
1,366,061 14.3
1,270,615 13.3
941,063
9.8
831,055
8.6
9,535,483 100.0

Education
Education level is a determinant of income level. Ones income directly affects their health by
determining ones ability to afford healthcare access and to live in areas with higher environmental
safety. The Rosewood Community has a significant refugee population. The refugees have been settling
in this area for over 20 years. Many of whom were not educated in the American school system, which
may account for the lowered educational attainment in the census tract 103. As can be seen in Table 3,
Guildford County has a population in which more than 1 in 5 has achieved a bachelors degree. This is to
be expected in an area with a high density of higher learning institutes. But in the Rosewood census
tract, which is only two miles from A&T University, only 2 in 100 have achieved a bachelors degree.
Guilford County also has a lower rate of the population who has only received a high school diploma or

less. But, the rate of those receiving only up to a 9th grade education in the census tract 103 is more than
6 times higher than Guilford County. In the Rosewood community, only 28.1% of the population has
achieved more than a high school education. These statistics could also be an indicator that even those
who immigrate to the area at the traditional school age are not seeking and obtaining higher levels of
education, thereby, limiting their income potential, access to healthcare, and overall health.
Table 3

Income/ Poverty Status

Income and poverty are strong indicators of health within the Rosewood Community. Study
results of income levels for the residents living in Rosewoods census tract (103) can be seen as a
reflection of their poverty level. The low percentage of income per household and high percentage of
individuals living under the poverty level are indications that the Rosewood Community is a community
containing health disparities. Table 4: Income levels of households vary depending on the population
under study. Income levels within Rosewoods census tract are lower than that of Guilford County and
North Carolina. In Rosewoods census tract, the majority of households (19.6%) had an income that was

between $35,000 and $49,999 in 2011. The majority of the households within Guilford County (17.7%)
and North Carolina (18.4%) had an income that was between $ 50,000 and $74,999 in 2011. This
difference in income becomes clearer when evaluating the average (mean) income of these different
populations. On average, Households in Rosewoods census tract have approximately half of the total
income than those of the county and state. Table 5: Studies show that Rosewoods census tract has a
significantly higher percentage of individuals living in poverty than both Guilford County and North
Carolina as a whole, regardless of age and sex. Overall, 32.2% of the population in Rosewoods census
tract lives beneath the poverty level, which is much higher than that of the countys population at 16.2%
and North Carolinas population at 16.1%. This means that the poverty level of Rosewoods census tract
is almost double that of the county and state.
Table 4

Table 5

Home Ownership vs. Rentership, Density, Home Values

The health status of communities depends not only on race and ethnicity, education, or income
and poverty status, but also on that communitys living environment. House values, household size, and
renters versus homeowners can affect an individuals home environment. Lower house values are
usually associated with poorer quality of homes and dilapidated properties that can pose a health threat
and increase the rates of accident and injury in that community. More densely populated homes could
also be harmful to families due to the increased susceptibility of communicable diseases in close
quarters. Additionally, homeownership leads to a more permanent and potentially more close-knit
community, which is better for emotional health versus the less stable rentership community. Housing
values in Rosewood are lower than the state and county average with 74.6% of the homes priced
between $50,000-$99,999. In contrast, in North Carolina and in Guilford County, 71.9% and 78.3% of
home-respectively-are valued above $100,000. There is a higher percentage of renters in this census
tract compared to Guilford County and North Carolina. Renters comprise about half of the population in
census tract 103. Although the Montagnards in this community seem to be closely connected, the rest

of the Rosewood community may be transient and less likely to form relationships with their neighbors.
Lastly, the average household size in the Rosewood census tract is consistent with that of North Carolina
and Guilford County. Interestingly, the margin of error in this tract is much higher than the state or
county. This statistic could be attributed to the number of immigrant and refugee populations that may
be uncomfortable with disclosing accurate information due to fear of persecution. Overall, the living
environment in the Rosewood community is below average compared to North Carolina and Guilford
County, which could have a detrimental effect on the health status of that community.
Table 6
Subject
HOUSING
OCCUPANCY
Total Housing Units
Owner-Occupied
Renter-Occupied
Average Household
Size
VALUE
LESS THAN $50,000
$50,000-$99,999
$100,000 or more

North Carolina
Estimate
Percent

Guilford County
Estimate
Percent

Census Tract 103

Estimate
Percent

4,286,863
2,483,743
1,180,376
2.55

100.0
67.8
32.2
x

216,137
120,778
71,286
2.52

100.00
62.9
37.1
x

911
417
420
2.63

100.0
49.8
50.2
x

238,438
459,366
1,785,939

9.6
18.5
71.9

4,649
21,588
94,541

3.8
17.9
78.3

44
311
62

10.6
12.6
76.8

Employment/ Disability
While income is one of the determinants of a persons health, their employment status
determines their income. Education and disability status can also have a major affect on employment.
The table 7 below shows that the distribution among the employment status of this neighborhood,
which is Census Tract 103 comparing with Guilford County and North Carolina. While the employment
rate is fairly dispersed in this community parallel to the county and the state; however the

unemployment rate seems higher. The groups aged 45 to 54 years old have an unemployment rate of
32.9%, while the county only has 8.1% and the state has 7.4%. This could mean that the older
generation who might not have an education or have language barrier could fall under this category.
Also, another significant figures to note are the unemployment rates by gender; females who are at
23.8%, and women with children under 6 years who are at 61.8%. This data shows that either women in
this community are at home taking care of their family and children or are dependent on men to provide
for the family.
Table 7

Disability is one of the health indicators that might limit people for education, and employment;
which could have direct effect on their health status. The Rosewood Neighborhood showed a higher
percentage of disability for every age group, according to the table 8 below. While the unemployment
rate for ages 45 to 54 was highest, the disability rate is also higher for people aged 16-64. The rate for
highest disability for this neighborhood is for age 65 and over, which is 71.2%, which means that 7 in 10
people in this age group have a disability, compared to Guilford County, which is 42.4% and the state,
45.7%. There is an intriguing data in the chart that shows mostly females have higher rate of disability

than males. Additionally, the percent of people employed with disability is lower for both males and
females living in this neighborhood compared to the county and the state.
Table 8

Work Cited
Table 1 and Table 2: U.S. Census Bureau; Census 2010, Summary File 1, DP1; generated by Yashonda
Mobley; using American FactFinder;

http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=DEC_10_SF
1_SF1DP1&prodType=table; (14 November 2013)
Table 3: U. S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, generated by April Richard; using American
Fact Finder; http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?
pid=ACS_12_1YR_S1501&prodType=table ; (10 November 2013).
Table 4: U. S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, generated by Elizabeth Lynch; using
American Fact Finder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_11_5Y
R_S1901&prodType=table ; (15 November 2013).
Table 5: U. S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, generated by Elizabeth Lynch; using
American Fact Finder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_11_5Y
R_S1701&prodType=table ; (15 November 2013).
Table 6: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, generated by Eliana Ribarsch; using American
Fact Finder;
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_11_5Y
R_DP04&prodType=table
Table 7 Employment Status 2007-2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. American Fact
Finder. United States Census Bureau (2011). 17 Nov 2013.
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_11_5Y
R_S2301&prodType=table.

Table 8 Disability Status by Sex: 2000, Census Summary 2000 File 4- Sample Data. American Fact
Finder. United States Census Bureau (2000). 17 Nov 2013.
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=DEC_00_SF4
_QTP21&prodType=table.