Hurricane Katrina: Social-Demographic Characteristics of Impacted Areas
Released: 2005-11-04T00:00:00

Introduction

On the morning of August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina made landfall on the Gulf Coastbetween the major cities of New Orleans, Louisiana, to the west, and Mobile, Alabama, to the east. Along the Gulf Coast and inland in the swath of the storm, Hurricane Katrina impacted hundreds ofthousands of families in three states (Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama) and contributed to thedeaths of more than 1,000 people. (1) While CRS estimates that 5.8 million people in three states mayhave experienced hurricane-force winds, the majority rode out the storm safely. The geographicrange of Katrina's hurricane-force winds corresponds quite closely with the 88 counties declared asdisaster areas by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2) . (See Figure 1 , depictingHurricane Katrina's storm track, estimated extent of hurricane and tropical force winds, countiesdesignated FEMA disaster areas, and county population density. (3) ) Property damage, loss of life,and sizeable displacement of population appear to have been largely concentrated within a 100-mileradius of where the storm made landfall. Within this area, damage due to high winds and stormsurge resulted in significant devastation, but flooding, largely resulting from breached levees andflood walls, affected the greatest number of people, with much of New Orleans flooded.

Figure 1. Hurricane Katrina: Storm Track and Counties Designated Eligible for Disaster Assistance (FEMA Individual Assistance), with 2004 CountyPopulation Density

Fourteen counties with a combined population of 2.5 million peopleexperienced some flooding and/or structural damage based on FEMA flood anddamage assessments. All of these counties are within the 100-mile radius of thestorm's landfall. Included in this region are the cities of New Orleans (estimated tohave 445,000 people), the Biloxi-Gulfport-Pascagoula Mississippi metropolitan area(estimated at 364,000 people), and Mobile (County) Alabama (estimated at 393,000persons). (4)

The populations of these 14 counties bore the brunt of the storm; however,the impact was not uniform across the counties. Using a combination of FEMAdamage assessment and Census data, CRS estimates that within these 14 counties,about 700,000 people may have been the most acutely impacted by HurricaneKatrina, experiencing flooding and/or significant structural damage. (See Figure 2 ,which provides an overview of the areas most directly impacted by the storm.) It isthis population -- those most severely impacted -- that is the report's primary focus.

Structure of the Report. Thisreport begins with a discussion of FEMA's disaster declaration process and itsapplication to Hurricane Katrina. It then presents CRS estimates of the population,living within 14 of the 88 counties designated as eligible for disaster assistance, whowere most affected and most likely displaced by the storm, in total and in each of thethree affected states: Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. These estimates arebroken down by whether people were living in areas that experienced flooding and/or structural damage (and further, by the level of structural damage). Thebalance of the report presents a social-demographic profile of this acutely affectedpopulation, looking at such characteristics as poverty and race/ethnicity status,homeownership and housing status. Separate discussions are also provided of theaged, children, and working-age adults. Although this report does not explicitlydiscuss policy implications, its findings are relevant to numerous aspects of thepost-Katrina debate on how to address the immediate and ongoing needs of theaffected populations, both in their home counties as well as the many other parts ofthe country to which some have relocated.

Figure 2. Hurricane Katrina: Overview of Areas Affected by Flooding and/or Structural Damage (Based on FEMA Flood and Damage Assessments)

Hurricane Katrina FEMA Declared Disaster Areas

The Presidential declaration of a major disaster identifies the types of disasterassistance available in affected areas (usually counties, or the state equivalent ofcounties or independent cities). The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief andEmergency Assistance Act authorizes a range of federal aid for states, localities, andhouseholds in the event of a Presidentially declared major disaster. The declarationprocess for "emergencies" is similar to that used for major disasters, but the criteria(based on the definition of "emergency") are less specific. (5) The two majorcategories of assistance are public assistance, which encompasses various forms ofaid to state and local governments and some nonprofit organizations, and federalassistance to individuals and households. (6) Federal assistance is provided to individuals andhouseholds who are uninsured or under-insured to pay for necessary expenses as aresult of the disaster that cannot be met otherwise, and may include financial help tooccupy alternative housing, provision of temporary housing units, home repair, andaid for other expenses.

FEMA has issued regulations that specify the criteria for determining whetherindividual and household assistance is available in an area. Though the Stafford Actprovides for Presidential discretion in designating areas as eligible for disaster aid,the regulations include the following factors for considering whether individual andhousehold assistance should be available in an area: (1) concentration of damage; (2)the degree of trauma to a state and communities, such as large numbers of injuriesor deaths, large scale disruptions of normal community functions, and emergencyneeds such as extended or widespread loss of power; (3) special populations, such aswhether the area includes low-income, elderly or unemployed persons; (4) the extentto which state and local or voluntary agencies can meet needs; (5) the amount ofinsurance coverage in an area; and (6) the amount of individual assistance providedby the state. (7) In all, a total of 31 parishes in Louisiana, 47counties in Mississippi, and 10 counties in Alabama were declared eligible forindividual and household disaster assistance. Government entities in wider areas ofthese states were declared eligible for other forms of disaster aid.

Hurricane Katrina -- Estimates of Population Affected in Impacted Areas

The analysis that follows focuses on the population in those areas that werehardest hit by the hurricane -- those communities that experienced significant damagefrom flooding (excluding areas with saturated soil) or that had assessed structuraldamage (excluding limited damage). The estimates are based on an analysis ofCensus 2000 Census Tract level data and FEMA damage assessment data, mappedinto a Geographic Information System (GIS). (8) It should beemphasized that the estimates are based on 2000 Census data, reflecting the numberand characteristics of the population at that time -- as if Hurricane Katrina struck inApril 2000, as opposed to August 2005.

FEMA Damage AssessmentCriteria. FEMA's damage assessment is characterized by severaldamage categories:

Structural Damage

Catastrophic Damage: Most solid and all light ormobile structures are destroyed;

Extensive Damage: Some solid structures aredestroyed; most sustain exterior and interior damage (e.g., roofs are missing, interiorwalls exposed), most mobile homes and light structures aredestroyed;

Moderate Damage: Solid structures sustain exteriordamage (e.g., missing roofs or roof segments); some mobile homes and lightstructures are destroyed, many are damaged or displaced;

Limited Damage: Generally superficial damage to solidstructures (e.g., loss of tiles or roof shingles); some mobile homes and light structuresare damaged or displaced;

Flood/water Damage

Flood: Indicates a separate severe damage categoryrelated to the specific effects of flooding;

Saturated Area: Indicates the possibility of waterdamage due to saturated soil.

It should be noted that flood and water damage are assessed separately fromstructural damage. Consequently, areas that are designated as flooded may or maynot also contain areas of assessed structural damage. Similarly, some areas withstructural damage may also be assessed as flooded.

Population Estimates. CRSestimates that more than 700,000 people were most acutely impacted by HurricaneKatrina, having lived in neighborhoods that either experienced flooding or significantstructural damage (catastrophic, extensive, or moderate). Persons who lived in areasthat experienced only limited damage, unless also flooded, or in non-floodedsaturated areas, are excluded from this estimate. Approximately 657,000 peoplelived in areas that were flooded, accounting for over 90% of those most acutelyimpacted by the storm. Among the 657,000 people likely impacted by flooding,approximately 25,000 also lived in areas with significant structural damage that waseither catastrophic (5,000), extensive (4,200), or moderate (15,400). In non-floodedareas, approximately 54,000 people were impacted by catastrophic (35,000),extensive (5,600), or moderate structural damage (13,700) -- likely due to windand/or surging water.

Because areas could be affected by both flooding and structural damage, wehave regrouped areas affected into the following, non-overlapping groups, to avoiddouble counting and to capture the populations most directly impacted by the storm:

Catastrophic damage, regardless of flood status(40,000);

Flooded, excluding areas of catastrophic damage(652,000);

Non-flooded, extensive damage (5,600);and

Non-flooded, moderate damage(13,700).

People who lived in areas that were affected only with limited damage (144,000), ornon-flooded saturated areas (not assessed in this analysis) are grouped with theremainder of the population in the 14 counties/parishes chosen for this analysis,based on the FEMA damage/flood assessment (see Table 1 ).

Flooding. As noted above,flooding is a separate assessment criterion, which may or may not overlap withassessed structural damage. Here, areas that had flooding and structural damage,other than catastrophic damage, are classified as flooded, along with those areas thatonly had flooding, and no assessed structural damage. The preponderance of thepopulation who lived in flooded areas were concentrated in Louisiana (97% of thetotal). St. Bernard Parish, to the south-east of New Orleans, was especially hard hitby flooding, with an estimated 65,000 affected -- nearly its entire population (97%). Over three-quarters (372,000) of Orleans Parish's population is estimated to havebeen affected by flooding, nearly half (13,000) of Plaquemines Parish's population,also to the south-east of New Orleans, and about two-fifths (181,000) of JeffersonParish's population, just to the west and south of New Orleans. (See Figure 3. )

In Mississippi, nearly 22,000 people appear to have been affected by flooding,with the majority (20,000) concentrated in Hancock County, the western most countyon the Mississippi Gulf Coast, just to the northeast of New Orleans, Louisiana.

Alabama experienced little flooding that directly impacted populated areas.

Table 1. Estimated Number of Persons Living inCounties with Assessed Damage or Flooding From Hurricane Katrina and NumberLiving in Areas with Significant Flooding or Damage (Based on FEMA Flood andDamage Assessments and Census 2000 Population)

Source: Estimates prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) withassistance from the Library of Congress Congressional Cartography Program, basedon analysis of FEMA flood and damage assessments and U.S. Census Bureau 2000Summary File 4 (SF4) data files.

a. Flooded and areas of assessed structural damage have been reclassified as follows,to avoid double counting.

Flooded: Any flooded area, excluding areas of catastrophic damage. Includes areaswith extensive, moderate, or limited damage where flooding also occurred, and areaswhere there was only flooding.

Catastrophic damage : Areas of catastrophic damage, regardless of flood status.

Extensive damage: Areas of extensive damage, other than those areas that alsoexperienced flooding.

Moderate damage: Areas of moderate damage, other than those areas that alsoexperienced flooding.

Figure 3. Hurricane Katrina: FEMA Damage Assessment New Orleans and Vicinity

Catastrophic Structural Damage. As noted above, an estimated 40,000 persons lived in areas that experiencedcatastrophic damage. In such areas, most structures were destroyed. The majorityof the population affected by catastrophic damage lived in Mississippi (94%), andwas concentrated predominantly in Harrison County, which includes the cities ofBiloxi and Gulfport. In Harrison County, 31,000 people are likely to have beendisplaced by catastrophic hurricane damage; they account for about four-fifths of thepopulation that experienced catastrophic damage, and about 17% of that county'spopulation. (See Figure 4. )

In Louisiana, an estimated 2,400 people are likely to have experiencedcatastrophic damage. Over 60% of this group (or 1,500 people) lived in PlaqueminesParish, where Katrina first made landfall. These 1,500 people comprise 5% of thatparish's population.

In Alabama, no catastrophic damage was assessed, and as noted above,minimal flooding affecting populated areas.

Extensive and Moderate Damage. An estimated 9,700 persons lived in areas that incurred extensive damage and 29,000 persons in areas that incurred moderate damage. Extensive damage meansthat some structures are destroyed and most have exterior and interior damage; andmost mobile homes and light structures are destroyed. In the moderate damagecategory, solid structures withstood exterior and interior damage, and some mobilehomes are destroyed.

Again, as with catastrophic damage, Mississippi accounted for the bulk of thepopulation affected by extensive (66%) and moderate (53%) damage. HancockCounty, to the west of Gulfport, had higher concentrations of its population affectedby extensive and moderate hurricane damage (33%) than bordering Harrison County (2%), or Jackson County (3%), further to the east, which encompasses Pascagoula.

In Louisiana, Orleans Parish accounted for the majority of the state'spopulation impacted by extensive damage (2,000, or two-thirds of those affected byextensive hurricane damage in Louisiana). Jefferson Parish accounted for overtwo-fifths (5,300) of Louisiana's population affected by moderate hurricane damage(13,000).

In Alabama, Mobile and Baldwin Counties experienced no catastrophicdamage, though some Alabamians are estimated to have lived in areas thatexperienced extensive damage (300) or moderate damage (660).

Figure 4. Hurricane Katrina: FEMA Damage Assessment Mississippi Gulf Coast, Bay St. Louis to Biloxi and Vicinity

Figure 5 depicts the relative impact of flood and storm damage fromHurricane Katrina in Louisiana and Mississippi in terms of the estimated number ofpeople affected.

Figure 5. Hurricane Katrina: Comparative Impact of Flooding and StormDamage in Louisiana and Mississippi (Estimated Number of People Impactedbased on 2000 Census Data)

Source : Estimates prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) withassistance from the Library of Congress Congressional Cartography Program, basedon analysis of FEMA flood and damage assessments and U.S. Census 2000 SummaryFile 4 (SF4) data files.

Hurricane Katrina -- Social Impacts

Hurricane Katrina likely made one of the poorest areas of the country evenpoorer. Among those displaced by the storm, many lost their homes, materialpossessions, and jobs. Some had insurance to replace their material property losses,received help from FEMA or Small Business loans to get by on an emergency basisor replace property, or received unemployment insurance or disaster unemploymentinsurance to replace lost wages. However, some who lived in the areas mostimpacted by the storm may now be destitute; while having financially gotten bybefore the storm, in the storm's aftermath they may have joined the ranks of the poor. Further, the socio-economic profile of the areas hardest hit by Katrina indicates thatthese newly poor would join a population that was already disproportionately poorand disadvantaged. Before the storm, the 700,000 people acutely affected by Katrina were more likely than Americans overall to be poor; minority (most oftenAfrican-American); less likely to be connected to the workforce; and more likely tobe educationally disadvantaged (i.e., not having completed a high school education). Both those who were poor before the storm, and those who have become poorfollowing the storm, are likely to face a particularly difficult time in reestablishingtheir lives, having few if any financial resources upon which to draw.

Mass Displacement

The economic and social impact of Hurricane Katrina will be felt for yearsto come. The hurricane resulted in mass displacement of people and fracturedcommunities. Estimates of the number of people displaced range widely; the analysisin this report assumes 700,000 were acutely impacted, Secretary Chertoff has statedthat FEMA has sheltered over 600,000, (9) and media reports have cited figures as high as 1.2million in describing the displaced. (10) At their peak, shelters were housing over270,000 evacuees, (11) but, as of October 19, fewer than 8,000 were stillin shelters. While some families have already returned home, many are living ininterim housing, including FEMA-provided trailers, and apartments, paid for in partwith grants from FEMA. FEMA reports, as of September 26, that it has approvedover 265,000 applications for temporary housing payments (12) and, as ofOctober 19, has provided just under 12,000 trailers. (13)

Whether these families will eventually return home or resettle in newcommunities is unclear and will not be fully known until the reconstruction of theGulf Coast is complete. Regardless, individuals, families, and communities havebeen, and will be, dramatically transformed by the storm.

Disproportionate Effects on Minorities and the Poor

Hurricane Katrina disproportionately impacted communities where the poorand minorities, mostly African-Americans, resided. The three states wherecommunities were damaged or flooded by the hurricane rank among the poorest inthe nation. According to the 2000 Census, Mississippi ranked second only to theDistrict of Columbia in its poverty rate; Louisiana was right behind it ranking third,and Alabama ranked sixth. CRS estimates that about one-fifth of the populationmost directly impacted by the storm was poor. That poverty rate (21%) was wellabove the national poverty rate of 12.4% recorded in the 2000 Census. (14)

Figure 6 shows the national poverty rate alongside the rates for Alabama,Louisiana, and Mississippi. Morever, the figure shows how the national andstatewide rates compare to rates in the storm-damaged or flooded areas in the threeaffected states combined, and individually. The poverty rates in the storm-damagedor flooded areas generally reflect the high poverty rates for the region as a whole, andare higher than the national average (12.4%) in each of the three states, although thepoverty rate for the damaged areas of Mississippi was considerably below the state'soverall poverty rate. The poverty rate for storm-damaged areas in all three statescombined (20.7%) is determined mostly by the high poverty rates in the flooded anddamaged areas of Louisiana, which has most of the population of the storm-damagedand flooded areas.

Figure 6. Poverty Rates for the United States, Alabama, Louisiana, andMississippi, and Hurricane Katrina Flood or Storm-Damaged Areas (Basedon 2000 Census Data)

Source: Estimates prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) withassistance from the Library of Congress Congressional Cartography Program, basedon analysis of FEMA flood and damage assessments and U.S. Census 2000 SummaryFile 4 (SF4) data files.

Note: Population for who poverty status is determined. Excludes persons living ininstitutions and unrelated individuals under age 15.

As noted above, CRS estimates that about one-fifth of the population mostdirectly impacted by the storm was poor (144,000 people). In addition, over 30% ofthe most impacted population had incomes below one-and-one-half times the povertyline and over 40% had income below twice the poverty line (See Figure 7 ). (15)

Figure 7. Estimated Number of Persons in Hurricane Katrina Flood orStorm-Damaged Areas, by Race and Poverty Status in 1999 (Population for whomPoverty Status is Determined based on 2000 Census Data)

Source: Estimates prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) withassistance from the Library of Congress Congressional Cartography Program, basedon analysis of FEMA flood and damage assessments and U.S. Census 2000 SummaryFile 4 (SF4) data files.

Note: Population for who poverty status is determined. Excludes persons living ininstitutions and unrelated individuals under age 15.

The hurricane's impact on New Orleans also took a disproportionate toll onAfrican Americans. An estimated 310,000 black people were directly impacted bythe storm, largely due to flooding in Orleans Parish. Blacks are estimated to haveaccounted for 44% of storm victims. In Orleans Parish, an estimated 272,000 blackpeople were displaced by flooding or damage, accounting for 73% of the populationaffected by the storm in the parish. In contrast, an estimated 101,000 non-blackpeople in Orleans Parish were displaced by flooding or damage, accounting for about63% of the non-black population living in the parish; still a high proportion affected,but somewhat less than that experienced by blacks.

Among blacks living in Orleans Parish who were most likely displaced by thestorm, over one-third (89,000 people, or 34.0% of displaced blacks) were estimatedto have been poor, based on 2000 Census data. Among non-black (predominantlywhite) persons living in the parish who were likely displaced by the storm, anestimated 14.6% (14,000) were poor.

The Aged

The aged may have been especially affected by Katrina. Many had close tiesto their communities, having resided there for years, and for some, their entirelifetimes. Some may have found it more difficult than others to evacuate. Theelderly are more likely to live alone, and less likely to own a car, or be able to drive. Some may have been more isolated, living alone, or homebound due to frailty ordisability.

Home Ownership Status and CommunityTies. Among households headed by persons age 65 or older whowere likely displaced by the storm, 70% are estimated to have owned their own home-- an ownership rate higher than any other age group. Among aged homeownerslikely displaced by the storm, over 70% had lived in their homes for over 20 years,and 47% over 30 years, in the year 2000. Among likely displaced aged renters, anestimated 55% had lived in their rental units for over 20 years, and 36% over 30years, based on 2000 Census data.

Living Arrangements. Anestimated 88,000 persons age 65 and older were likely displaced by HurricaneKatrina, or 12.4% of the population affected by flooding and/or storm damage.Among the aged population affected, an estimated 27,000 lived alone, in one-personhouseholds, which accounted for 41% of households with an aged member.

The hurricane likely displaced an estimated 45,000 persons age 75 and older,a population prone to frailty. Among this group, nearly 15,000 are estimated to havelived alone, in one-person households, which accounted for 45% of the householdswith a member age 75 or older.

Disability Status. Nearly half(48%) of all persons age 65 or older living in flooded or damage-affected areasreported having a disability, and over one-quarter (26%) reported two or more typesof disability. (16) Reported disabilities included sensory disabilities(blindness, deafness, or severe hearing impairment), and other disabilities reflectingconditions lasting more than six months that limit various activities. Theseactivity-limiting disabilities include mental disabilities (difficulty learning,remembering, or concentrating); self-care disabilities (difficulty dressing, bathing,or getting around inside the home); and, going outside disabilities (difficulty goingoutside the home alone to shop or visit a doctor's office). An estimated 13% ofpersons age 65 and older in the flood or damage affected areas reported a self caredisability, and 19% of those age 75 and older; one-quarter of those age 65 and olderreported a disability that made it difficult to go outside, unassisted, and of those age75 and older, one-third reported such a disability.

Poverty Status. Among agedpersons likely displaced by the storm, an estimated 12,600, based on 2000 Censusdata, were poor, or about 14.7% of the aged displaced population, and nearly 23,600(27.6%) had incomes below 150% of the poverty line.

Vehicle Availability. Among allhouseholds living in the flood or damage-affected areas, an estimated 19% had novehicle available to the household. Among households with heads age 65 or older,over one-quarter (26%) were without a vehicle, and among those age 75 or older,one-third (33%). In order to evacuate from the storm, these households would havebeen dependent on other nonresident family members, friends, neighbors, or publicor specially arranged transportation.

Children

About one-fourth of the people who lived in areas damaged or flooded byHurricane Katrina were children (under age 18). Hurricane Katrina struck at thebeginning of the school year, potentially displacing an estimated 183,000 children,based on CRS analysis of 2000 Census data, including an estimated 136,000 childrenwho were of school age. An estimated 47,000 children under the age of 5 lived inneighborhoods that experienced flooding or damage from the hurricane.

Child Poverty Rates in areas Acutely Affected byHurricane Katrina. The characteristics of the children in thedamaged and flooded areas reflect greater disadvantage compared with thecharacteristics of children in the nation as a whole. Many of the children in affectedareas were poor. Table 2 shows the number of poor children and the child povertyrate in the affected areas. Note that the number of children for whom the CensusBureau determines poverty status (180,000) is slightly less than the total for allchildren in these areas (183,000), because poverty is not determined for childrenunder the age of 15 who live in group quarters (e.g., foster children). The povertyrate of 30% for children in hurricane-flooded or damaged areas is almost twice the2000 Census child poverty rate for the nation as a whole of 16.6%.

Table 2. Number and Poverty Rate forChildren in Hurricane Katrina Flooded or Damaged Areas

Source: Estimates prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) withassistance from the Library of Congress Congressional Cartography Program, basedon analysis of FEMA flood and damage assessments and U.S. Census 2000 SummaryFile 4 (SF4) data files

The table shows that about 15,000 children of preschool age (age 0-4), orabout one-third of all children in that age group, were poor. Another 40,000 schoolage children who lived in flooded or hurricane-damaged areas were poor.

Over half (55%) of the children most likely to have been displaced by thehurricane were African-American based on 2000 Census data. Approximately 45%of the displaced black children were estimated to have been poor (about 45,000children), accounting for 25% of all children displaced by the storm, and 82% of all poor displaced children.

Living Arrangements of Children inHurricane-Affected Areas. Children in the areas damaged andflooded by Hurricane Katrina were more likely than children nationwide to live infemale-headed families. Table 3 shows the percent of children (17) in thehurricane-damaged or flooded areas by their family type -- whether they lived in afamily headed by a married couple or single female or male head. Overall, 38% of children under the age of 18 in the hurricane-affected areas lived with a female head;nationally, this percentage is 20%. Children in female-headed families are morelikely to be poor than children living in married couple or other families. (Accordingto the 2000 Census, nationwide, 41% of children in female-headed families were inpoverty versus an overall poverty rate of 16%.) Further, a single mother often needschild care to enter the workforce or remain working. In the HurricaneKatrina-damaged and flooded areas, there were 12,000 preschool children living infamilies headed by a single mother. The high rate of children living with singlemothers also is consistent with the hurricane having disproportionately affectedAfrican-Americans, as African-American children are more likely than children ofother racial and ethnic groups to be raised by a single mother.

Table 3. Own Children in Hurricane KatrinaFlood and Storm-Damaged Areas, by Age and Family Type

Source: Estimates prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) withassistance from the Library of Congress Congressional Cartography Program, basedon analysis of FEMA flood and damage assessments and U.S. Census 2000 SummaryFile 4 (SF4) data files.

Working-Age Adults

The disproportionate impact of Hurricane Katrina on the poor is also shownthrough other indicators of disadvantage. Hurricane-damaged areas tended to havelower labor force participation rates and higher unemployment rates than the nationas a whole.

Labor Force Participation. Persons who are either with a job (employed), or actively searching for work(unemployed) are considered as participating in the labor force. Labor forceparticipation among men -- both youth (aged 16-24) and adults (aged 25-64) -- in thehurricane-damaged areas was considerably below that in the nation as a whole. Thelabor force participation rate for male youths in hurricane-damaged areas was 55%,compared with a nationwide average rate of 65%. For adult men, the labor forceparticipation rate was 77% in hurricane-damaged areas, compared with an 82% rateon average nationwide. Additionally, unemployment rates for both youth and adultmen were higher in hurricane-damaged areas than nationally. (18) Thecombined lower levels of labor force participation and higher unemployment meantthat a larger share of men in hurricane-damaged areas were not working than is truenationally. Overall, an estimated 72,000 men over the age of 16 were not working. Of this number, 47,000 were age 25-64.

The labor force participation and work status of young women (aged 16-24)is similar to that for young men: lower labor force participation rates than thenational average (57% versus 62% nationally) and higher rates of unemployment. Almost 19% of young women aged 16-24 in hurricane-damaged or flooded areaswere unemployed, an even higher unemployment rate than observed for young men.However, women aged 25-64 in hurricane-damaged areas had very similar laborforce participation rates to the national average, though their unemployment rateswere above the national average.

Employment Population Ratio. Figure 8 shows the employment-population ratio for youths (age 16-24) and primeworking age adults (age 25-64) for the nation as a whole and for the areas damagedor flooded by Hurricane Katrina for men and women. The employment-populationratio is the percentage of the population actually employed. For all groups, those inthe areas acutely affected by the hurricane had lower employment rates than for thenation as a whole. However, for men, both youths and prime working-aged men, theemployment-population ratio in hurricane-affected areas was substantially lower thanthe national average, reflecting both lower labor force participation and higherunemployment rates for men. Employment-population ratios for young women inhurricane-affected areas were also substantially below national averages. However,the employment-population ratio for prime working-aged women inhurricane-affected areas was only slightly below average.

Figure 8. Employment-Population Ratios for Youth and PrimeWorking-Age Men and Women in Hurricane Katrina Flood orStorm-Damaged Areas Compared with National Averages (Based on 2000Census Data)

Source: Estimates prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) withassistance from the Library of Congress Congressional Cartography Program, basedon analysis of FEMA flood and damage assessments and U.S. Census 2000 SummaryFile 4 (SF4) data files.

Education. The adult populationliving in hurricane-damaged or flooded areas was also educationally disadvantagedrelative to the averages for the nation as a whole. Overall, 23% of adults (aged 25and over) in storm-damaged or flooded areas lacked a high school diploma,representing 106,000 people.

Younger adults living in hurricane-damaged or flooded areas had lower levelsof educational attainment compared to their counterparts living in U.S. metropolitanareas overall. (19) Among younger adults, age 18 to 34, who werenot enrolled in school, 22.8% had not attained a high school diploma, or itsequivalent, compared to 20.6% in U.S. metropolitan areas overall. (See Figure 9. ) In U.S. metropolitan areas overall, 29.3% of younger adults who were no longer inschool had attained a post-secondary school degree (associates, bachelors, graduateor professional degree), compared to 22.5% of those living in Katrina storm orflood-damaged areas.

Figure 9. Educational Attainment of Younger Adults (Age 18 to 34) in HurricaneKatrina Flood or Storm-Damaged Areas Compared to U.S. Metropolitan AreasOverall (Based on 2000 Census Data)

Source: Estimates prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) withassistance from the Library of Congress Congressional Cartography Program, basedon analysis of FEMA flood and damage assessments and U.S. Census 2000 SummaryFile 4 (SF4) data files.

Note: Estimates are for younger adults not enrolled in school.

Aggregate Earnings Losses. Atthe time of the 2000 Census, households living in the hurricane-damaged or floodedareas had estimated aggregate annual earnings in 1999 of $10 billion. This figureincludes wages and salaries, and net self employment income. Additionally,employers in the affected areas may have depended on workers who lived in areasthat were less severely impacted by the storm, and their earnings are not included inthis estimate. Some of the workers in the most affected areas may have had jobselsewhere, in less affected areas, and could conceivably retain their jobs and earnings. The estimated $10 billion in earnings of households that lived in hurricane-damagedor flooded areas amounts to nearly 29% of the total earnings of all households livingin the 14 county area. The $10 billion aggregate earnings figure, cited above, is onlya crude approximation of potential lost earnings in the affected areas, reflectingeconomic circumstances of households in 1999, not 2005, but even by this crudemeasure, the impact is substantial.

Homeownership and Housing Characteristics

For most American families, a home is or will be their largest investment andasset. It can be a source of equity and financial stability, as well as a tie to thecommunity. Another indicator of the pre-hurricane financial disadvantage in theareas impacted by Hurricane Katrina is the low rate of homeownership. Accordingto CRS analyses, the area most heavily impacted by Hurricane Katrina had a lowerthan average proportion of homeowners. The rate of homeownership among allhouseholds in occupied housing units was 66% nationally in 2000, according toCensus figures, but was only 55% in the Katrina-impacted areas. As shown in Figure10 , this lag existed for the elderly, the non-elderly as well as the poor.

Figure 10. Percent of People Living in Owner-Occupied Housing inHurricane Katrina Flood or Storm-Damaged Areas Compared to the Nation (Based on 2000 Census Data)

Source: Estimates prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) withassistance from the Library of Congress Congressional Cartography Program, basedon analysis of FEMA flood and damage assessments and U.S. Census 2000 SummaryFile 4 (SF4) data files.

It is unclear whether this lower rate of homeownership will impact the returnof residents displaced by Hurricane Katrina. Renters are more mobile and may havean easier time resettling in new communities than homeowners, who will need toeither repair and return to damaged homes or sell them, assuming that they are worthmore than the amount of debt still owed on them. Note that 65% of owner-occupiedhomes in the impacted region had some form of mortgage at the time of the 2000Census. While Census data cannot answer the question of who will return, the datado indicate that homeowners in the impacted areas had lived in their homes for manyyears, possibly indicating strong community ties. More than half of all homeownershad lived in their homes for 20 or more years (compared to 42% nationally), and justunder a third had lived in their homes for 30 or more years (compared to 22%nationally). The data also indicate that, despite their general mobility, renters mayalso have had strong ties, with 29% having lived in their homes for 10 years or more(compared to 23% nationally).

Most homeowners in impacted areas lived in single-family homes (69%),although a larger share than the national average lived in mobile homes (25%,compared to 8% nationally). The finding that a high percentage of homes in thedamaged areas are mobile homes is not surprising, given the lower incomes in theimpacted areas as well as mobile homes' susceptibility to damage.

Overall, an estimated 55% of 278,000 households impacted by the stormowned their own home. Among poor households, over one-quarter owned theirhome (27%); among non-poor households, over three-fifths (62%). (20)

About a quarter of all owners and 46% of all renters in the impacted areas hadat least one housing condition as of the 2000 Census. Housing conditions are definedas paying more than 30% of income toward housing costs (the standard consideredaffordable), living with more than 1.01 person per room (the standard forovercrowding), and lacking complete plumbing and/or kitchen facilities (the standardfor housing inadequacy). These rates are consistent with the national averages (of24% of owners and 43% of renters). It is likely that these measures of inadequacyand/or affordability will change as housing is rebuilt and new stock is added after thehurricane.

Status of Other Assessments

This report's analysis is based on the merger of FEMA flood and damageassessments (data of September 21, 2005) with Census 2000 data. The FEMA floodand damage assessments are derived from interpretations of satellite and aircraftoverflight imagery of the impacted area, combined with analysts' assessments on thescene. The FEMA flood and damage assessments were primarily derived frominterpretations of aerial imagery, which may be limited by the range of the flightsas well as subject to errors in categorizing areas. (The FEMA flood assessmentrepresents the high-water mark of hurricane-related flooding, not the level of floodingon September 21.) Although the data from Census 2000 are now more than fiveyears old, they are the only currently available data at the geographic scale required(Census Blocks and Tracts) to infer the social and demographic characteristics ofpopulations who were likely directly impacted by hurricane damage and/or flooding.The estimates presented in this report rely heavily on the completeness and accuracyof the FEMA flood and damage assessment data. The FEMA data are likely to havecaptured most, but not all hurricane-related damage, and miss inland damage alongthe hurricane's storm track through Mississippi (mostly less than catastrophicdamage).

The data that were used in this report are not the only data being developedto assess Hurricane Katrina's impact. More will become available as time goes on. In terms of categorizing the damage, the NOAA (National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration) has continued to conduct flyovers of the impacted area and updateits data, especially as flood waters have receded. Further, local officials andinsurance adjusters have now gone into many of the impacted areas to conductthorough assessments of structural damage. The American Red Cross has alsoconducted a structure-by-structure damage assessment. Using trained volunteers anddamage categories aligned with FEMA, the American Red Cross has estimated that885,791 structures were impacted by Hurricane Katrina, of which 492,576 wereeither destroyed (352,930) or sustained major damage (139,646). The breakdown,as of October 3, 2005, is as follows:

Source: Greg Tune, American Red Cross. Numbers verbally presented at HousingStatistics Users Group meeting on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 at the NationalAssociation of Home Builders Headquarters, Washington, DC.

Note: More recent Red Cross data discussed below are not included in this tablebecause they include Hurricane Rita.

Further assessments conducted by the American Red Cross suggest that theFEMA damage assessment does not capture the full extent of inland damage,concentrated largely along Hurricane Katrina's storm track in Mississippi. TheFEMA damage assessment accounts for damage in just three Mississippi Counties -- Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson -- that are situated directly on the Gulf Coast. Information obtained from the American Red Cross indicate 4,609 destroyeddwellings in areas that are outside of these three counties, accounting for 6.7% of alldestroyed dwellings (68,729) in Mississippi. (21) The RedCross's assessment identifies a total of 65,237 dwellings that suffered major damage(e.g., large portions of roofs missing, extensive wall damage) in Mississippi, ofwhich 45.9% (29,917) were located in inland counties, not included in the FEMAassessment and therefore not included in this CRS analysis.

The best source of data about the families who were displaced as a result ofHurricane Katrina is the FEMA database of registrants. By early October, over 2million individuals and households (not all necessarily displaced) had registered withFEMA for disaster assistance as a result of hurricanes Katrina and Rita . (22) Thatdatabase includes information about each person who has registered for assistanceafter the disaster, including information about where they lived prior to evacuationand where they are living after the disaster, based on postal zipcodes. While notpublicly available, at least one newspaper has had access to the zipcode informationand has published a map showing where families were from and where they havegone. (23) While FEMA has stated it is concerned about the privacy rights of registrants, (24) it can beexpected that more information about displaced families will become available in thefuture from this database.

Appendix A. Methodology

The estimates presented in this report are based on FEMA flood and damageassessment data, combined with Census 2000 demographic and geographic boundarydata. The FEMA flood and damage assessments are as of September 21, 2005. (25) Theyreflect FEMA's assessment of areas affected by structural damage and/or flooding,based on remote sensing imagery (satellite and aircraft) interpretation, combined withanalysts' assessments on the scene. (The FEMA flood assessment represents thehigh-water mark of hurricane-related flooding, not the level of flooding onSeptember 21). FEMA data files showing the areas affected by flooding and/orstructural damage were obtained and mapped into a Geographic Information System(GIS) by a Library of Congress cartographer. Among its other features, the GIScontains U.S. Census population and geographic boundary data, and provides thefacility for geo-spatial analysis and mapping. The GIS was used to apportion areasof assessed damage and/or flooding to Census Blocks, and then to aggregate CensusBlocks up to Census Tracts. Flood and damage apportionment factors were thenapplied to Census 2000 Tract-level data in order to assess impacted areas in terms ofthe social-demographic characteristics of the population most likely to have beendirectly affected by the hurricane.

As noted in the body of the report, the estimates are based on 2000 data,reflecting the number and characteristics of the population at that time -- as if thehurricane struck in April 2000, as opposed to August 2005. Numbers presented inthis report are estimates, providing a rough approximation of the numbers andcharacteristics of persons, families, and households that are most likely to have beenimpacted by the hurricane. The estimates are based on the methodology describedabove, and rely heavily on the completeness and accuracy of the FEMA flood anddamage assessment data.

Subsequent and ongoing assessments conducted by the American Red Crosssuggest that the FEMA damage assessment does not capture the extent of inlanddamage, concentrated largely along Hurricane Katrina's storm track throughMississippi. The FEMA damage assessment accounts for damage in just threeMississippi Counties -- Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson -- that are situated directlyon the Gulf Coast. Information obtained from the American Red Cross indicate4,609 destroyed dwellings in areas outside of these three counties, accounting for6.7% of all destroyed dwellings (68,729) in Mississippi. (26) The RedCross's assessment identifies a total of 65,237 dwellings that suffered major damage(e.g., large portions of roofs missing, extensive wall damage) in Mississippi, ofwhich 45.9% (29,917) were located in inland counties, not included in the FEMAassessment and therefore not included in this CRS analysis.

FEMA Flooding and Damage Assessments

The FEMA flooding and structural damage data are based on separateassessments. Consequently, areas with flooding and structural damage may overlap.Structural damage is characterized at four different levels:

Catastrophic Damage: Most solid and all light or mobilestructures are destroyed;

Extensive Damage: Some solid structures are destroyed; mostsustain exterior and interior damage (e.g., roofs are missing, interior walls exposed),most mobile homes and light structures are destroyed;

Moderate Damage: Solid structures sustain exterior damage(e.g., missing roofs or roof segments); some mobile homes and light structures aredestroyed, many are damaged or displaced;

Limited Damage: Generally superficial damage to solidstructures (e.g., loss of tiles or roof shingles); some mobile homes and light structuresare damaged or displaced.

Recategorization into Non-OverlappingAreas. GIS methods were applied to separate areas with floodingor structural damage only, from those areas where flooding and structural damageoverlapped, in order to avoid double counting. Ten mutually exclusive areas wereinitially derived: 1) Flooding Only, 2) Catastrophic Damage Only, 3) ExtensiveDamage Only, 4) Moderate Damage Only, 5) Limited Damage Only, 6) Flooding andCatastrophic Damage, 7) Flooding and Extensive Damage, 8) Flooding and ModerateDamage, 9) Flooding and Limited Damage, 10) No Flooding or Damage.

Apportion Census Block Populations byFlood/Damaged Areas. The areas of assessed damage and/orflooding, defined above, were apportioned by Census Block (the smallest unit ofCensus geography), based on the population in the Block, and the Block'soverlapping and non-overlapping habitable area (i.e., land, as opposed to water) withthe assessed damage areas. Census Block boundaries are not coincident with thegeographic boundaries of the assessed damaged and/or flooded areas. In order toapportion the 10 mutually exclusive categories (mentioned above), an arealpercentage of the overlapping damaged and/or flooded area was applied to theCensus 2000 Block population. To do this, we had to make the assumption thatpopulation is evenly distributed within the Census Block. Because of the small areageography of the Census Block, error introduced at the Block level is less than itwould be if the apportionment methodology had been implemented directly at theTract level. Apportioned Census Block populations, by percent in flood areas, and/orareas with assessed structural damage, were then aggregated by Census Tract, toarrive at apportionment rates for the Tract, for flooding and/or level of structuraldamage, based on the 10 non-overlapping areas, defined above.

Apportionment Rates Applied to Census 2000 Tract-Level Data

The apportionment rates, derived above, were then applied to Census 2000data, summarized at the Census Tract level. (27) TheCensus 2000 summary Tract level data provide the lowest level of geographical detailthat is publicly available on a broad range of social, demographic, income, andhousing characteristics of the population.

As an example, if a Census Tract had a population in 2000 of 3,200people (28) and 20% of its population was estimated to have lived in a flooded area based on theCensus Block population apportionment rate procedure described above, then 640people would be estimated to have lived in flooded areas, and 2,560 in non-floodedareas. If 40% of that Census Tract's population was African American (1,280 people), then, under the methodology employed, the same share for the Tract's overallpopulation estimated to live in its flooded area (i.e., 20%), would be applied to theblack population in the Tract (1,280), to arrive at an estimate of 256 black peoplewho lived in the flooded area of the Tract. While the methodology estimatesproportionate shares of Census Blocks' populations affected by flooding and/orstructural damage at the aggregated Census Tract level, it does not distinguish withina Census Tract where individuals with different characteristics lived. For example,it assumes at the Census Tract level, the entire population was affectedproportionately, regardless of their characteristics or where they lived within theTract.

Regrouping of Areas for Analysis

The ten mutually exclusive areas of flooding and/or damage, describedearlier, were regrouped into areas presented in the analysis. Areas with CatastrophicDamage were combined into one grouping, regardless of whether there was alsoFlooding (i.e., categories 1 and 2, above). All areas with Flooding, other than thosethat also had Catastrophic Damage (2), were combined into Flooded areas (i.e, 1, 7,8, and 9, above). Comprehensive data on the depth or duration of flooding by areawere not available when we conducted this analysis, so we are unable to distinguishthe severity of flooding. Areas without flooding, that had Extensive (3) or ModerateDamage (4) were combined into a single category. Lastly, areas with LimitedDamage and no flooding (5) were combined with areas where there was no Floodingor Damage (10).

Among the 14 counties or parishes where any damage or flooding was assessed, the estimated populations in the redefined areas based on their April 2000Census populations were as follows:

Catastrophic damage, regardless of flood status(40,000);

Flooded, excluding areas of catastrophic damage(652,000);

Non-flooded, extensive damage (5,600);

Non-flooded, moderate damage(13,700);

No damage or flooding, or limited damage only(1,747,000).