The Bush Foundation, in partnership with the South Dakota Dashboard, is studying the outcomes and impact of three community information and data projects across South Dakota, North Dakota and Minnesota. Your input is needed as we investigate who our users are and how they use our website.
The purposes of this evaluation are to assess whether:
Answer our survey to help inform our ongoing work at the South Dakota Dashboard, as well as highlight strengths and possible areas of improvement.
If you have any questions about this survey, please contact South Dakota Dashboard data specialist Callie Tysdal at 605-716-0058 or by email.
The South Dakota Dashboard’s City Profiles have recently been updated with 2011-2015 estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
The new data provide key information on South Dakota’s cities and towns with populations over 1,000. Each profile features easy-to-read, one-page statistical information including population, racial breakdown, gender breakdown, poverty rates, disability rates, home ownership rates, housing cost burden data, median household incomes, and median age data.
Cities and towns currently available include:
People were far more likely to move to South Dakota than move away, according to a new report from United Van Lines. This report is good news for the Rushmore State, but not for the reasons currently reported.
South Dakota is not the most popular destination for people to move to—in actuality, California had the most number of inbound moves at 12,259 compared to South Dakota’s 341 total inbound moves. However, California had 12,488 outbound moves, resulting in California’s balanced migration. Conversely, South Dakota reported only 163 outbound moves.
A couple of factors likely play into South Dakota’s top ranking, including retirees who want to live in the inter-mountain west. The United Van Lines report notes that one in four inbound moves nationally was for retirement reasons. With no income tax and a high quality of life, especially in the Black Hills, this may be a key factor.
Second, people across the nation are less likely to move based on economic opportunity and more based on personal reasons, such as a desire to be closer to family or for retirement purposes. Additionally, the age of the internet has made working remotely a possibility—a substantial aid to those wishing to relocate to South Dakota.
Within the Great Plains region, South Dakota had more inbound moves than North Dakota and Wyoming, states with struggling economies in 2016, but fewer inbound moves than Nebraska, Iowa and Minnesota.
|Total Shipments||From||To||Percentage From||Percentage To||Ranking|
Personal income in South Dakota rose 1.4 percent between the second and third quarters of 2016, compared to a 1.1 percent increase for the nation, according to data released this week by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). After ranking 47th in the nation in the second quarter of the year, South Dakota’s personal income growth led all other states in the third quarter.
South Dakota’s growth was driven primarily by increases in wages and salaries and proprietor’s income, as compared to income from investments or government transfer payments under programs like Social Security. Improvements in farm income contributed 19 percent to the state’s total growth, followed by Finance and Insurance (17 percent), Health Care and Social Assistance (16 percent) and Government (14 percent).
South Dakota typically sees a surge in farm incomes during the third quarter of the year, and this year was no exception. Farm income grew by $80 million or 10.82 percent compared to the second quarter of the year. Other fast-growing sectors included Mining (up 3.48 percent), Transportation and Warehousing (up 3.27 percent), Management (up 3.57 percent), and Arts, Entertainment and Recreation (up 3.48 percent). No sectors experienced a decline in the third quarter.
Total personal income in South Dakota rose by 4.8 percent in 2015 according to new figures released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Per capita personal income growth across the state was slightly lower at 4.2 percent.
The new data also shows that changes in per capita personal income varied dramatically across the state. Sully County experienced the largest drop in per capita personal income growth in the nation, a decline of 30.3 percent. Nearby Lyman County, which experienced a large decline of 22.8 percent in per capita personal income in 2014, made a substantial gain of 12.4 percent in 2015. Meanwhile, in Ziebach County per capita personal income fell by 22.7 percent after rising 45.0 percent in 2014.
Counties in southeastern South Dakota led the state in personal income growth in 2015. While most of the rest of the state experienced declines, these counties in southeastern South Dakota had double-digit increases in per capita personal income growth.
Counties in South Dakota’s metropolitan areas experienced less dramatic swings in personal income. In the Sioux Falls metropolitan area, for example, Minnehaha and Lincoln counties saw total increases of 7.3 and 10.3 percent in personal income. However, per capita personal income was slightly lower at 5.8 and 7.5 percent, respectively.
Union County, a part of the Sioux City metropolitan area in the heart of the Corn Belt, had personal income growth of 7.3 percent and an increase in per capita personal income of 8.1 percent.
In the western part of the state, Pennington, Meade and Custer counties, which make up the Rapid City metropolitan area, enjoyed personal income increases of 3.7, 2.1, and 1.9 percent. Per capita personal income also increased by 3.3, 1.8, and 1.9 percent respectively.
In Miner County, total personal income increased by 1.1 percent, but per capita personal income grew by 4.4 percent, making it the only county in the state to enjoy a decline in income inequality.
The U.S. Census Bureau released the 2011-2015 American Community Survey five year statistics today, as reported by the State Data Center. The new data highlight the differences and similarities between rural and urban areas in the United States.
The State Data Center found that 42.9 percent of the population in South Dakota lives in rural areas, compared to 19.3 percent nationally. Unlike other areas in the country, poverty rates in South Dakota’s rural areas were not significantly different from the state’s metropolitan areas.
The new data show that rural South Dakotans are less likely to have health insurance than their urban counterparts. 11.6 percent of rural South Dakotans are without insurance, compared to 10.6 percent of urban South Dakotans. Nearly 30 percent of young adults in rural areas, aged 19-25 were without health insurance while nearly 18 percent of young adults in urban areas lacked health insurance.
While 41 states experienced an increase in gross domestic product (GDP) in the second quarter of 2016, South Dakota’s economy lagged, according to a recent release from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. South Dakota’s GDP declined by 1.0 percent in the second quarter, placing the state at No. 46 in the nation for economic growth.
Regionally, South Dakota outperformed North Dakota and Wyoming, which experienced declines of 5.6 and 5.3 percent, respectively. Nebraska led the region in growth at 4.3 percent, while Minnesota experienced no growth and Iowa increased modestly at 1.3 percent.
South Dakota agriculture played a key role in the state’s economic slowdown, dropping by 2.2 percent while mining fell by 0.4 percent. Real estate, durable goods and health care industries each edged up by 0.4 percent. South Dakota’s transportation industry increased marginally at 0.1 percent in the second quarter, but it was well below the national growth rate of 14.0 percent for this sector.
Although the unemployment rate in South Dakota remains low, sales tax revenue has fallen short of projections and the state’s projected budget deficit has increased substantially over the past four months, reports the Capital Journal. The combination of these conditions means that Governor Dennis Daugaard and the legislature will either have to find additional revenue or make cuts to balance revenues and expenses before the end of South Dakota’s 2017 fiscal year in July.
After the Legislature approved a 0.5 percent increase in sales tax to supplement teacher pay, lawmakers anticipated a 16.9 percent increase in sales tax revenue, but so far sales tax revenues are up only 9.4 percent. To ensure that educators’ salary increases are maintained and property tax burdens are relieved, the state needs an additional $19.9 million.
Sales tax revenues have been hit by a slowdown in agriculture, which has resulted in a significant decline in farm equipment purchases. Alongside the decline in the agricultural economy, an increase in online sales may be contributing to the declining retail industry in South Dakota, according to KSFY News. State Economist Jim Terwilliger noted that out-of-state online retailers are not required to charge state sales tax. Although consumers are supposed to pay use tax for these purchases, many do not. Last year the Legislature passed Senate Bill 106 to force large out-of-state online retailers to collect and pay sales tax. The law seeks to challenge a 1992 US Supreme Court case that bars states from imposing tax collection on retailers who do not have a physical presence in the state. The issue is currently being considered in state court.
Today is #GivingTuesday, which marks the beginning of the giving season. Consider a tax-exempt gift to the South Dakota Dashboard today! Your gift not only helps us meet our year end goals, but ensures that local news, information and data remain publicly available for years to come.
Curious about just how much impact your gift has? Here are some examples:
As a non-profit enterprise, we rely on contributions from supporters like you. Thank you for your support today and always!
Donate to the South Dakota Dashboard this Giving Tuesday by following the link or entering your information below!
This Thanksgiving, the Black Hills Knowledge Network and South Dakota Dashboard staff would like to express their thanks and gratitude for all the contributions and support they have received from organizations throughout the Black Hills and across the Rushmore State. Thanks and appreciation are due to the Rapid City Public Library and 12 additional regional partner libraries, Rapid City Convention and Visitor’s Bureau, Rapid City Chamber of Commerce, South Dakota State University Data Center, Minnesota Compass, North Dakota Compass, South Dakota Kids Count, Wall Economic Development, Rushmore Region Economic Development and Wilder Research. We are also thankful for the 33,045 visitors to the Black Hills Knowledge Network and 8,852 visitors to the South Dakota Dashboard so far this year!
With the assistance of the aforementioned contributing partners, we are able to share some South Dakota data trends from 2015 for which we are thankful.
1. Fewer South Dakotans Living in Poverty in 2015
In 2015, poverty rates across South Dakota and the nation declined slightly to 13.7 percent and 14.7 percent respectively, according to recent federal data. The largest decrease was seen in single women with children, which was down five percent from 2014.
2. Cautious Optimism Seen in 2015 South Dakota Median Income
Following the national trend, South Dakotans’ median household income rose for the second year in a row to $53,017. Since 2006, South Dakota's median household income—in inflation-adjusted 2015 dollars—has hovered around $50,000, with a low of $49,645 in 2007 and a high of $53,017 in 2015. That compares to $50,191 in 1999 (in inflation-adjusted dollars).
3. Median Household Income for Seniors on the Rise in South Dakota in 2015
Median household incomes for South Dakotans over the age of 65 increased by over $2,600, according to recent federal data. South Dakotans over the age of 65 had median household incomes of $37,896 in 2015, but still fell short of the national average of $40,971.