the latino population of new york city 1990 –...

The Latino Population of

New York City 1990 – 2015

Laird W. Bergad

Distinguished Professor Department of Latin American, Latino and

Puerto Rican Studies Lehman College

Ph.D. Program in History Graduate Center

City University of New York

Director, Center for Latin American, Caribbean, and Latino Studies

Latino Data Project - Report 65 – December 2016

Center for Latin American, Caribbean, and Latino Studies

Graduate Center City University of New York 365 Fifth Avenue Room 5419 New York, New York 10016

212-817-8438

[email protected] http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu/

The analysis of the 2015 American Community Survey IPUMS data was carried out by Lawrence Cappello, Ph.D. CLACLS Director of Quantitative Research.

http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu/

http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu/

The Center for Latin American, Caribbean and Latino Studies is a research institute that works for the advancement of the study of Latin America, the Caribbean, and Latinos in the United States in the doctoral programs at the CUNY Graduate Center. One of its major priorities is to provide funding and research opportunities to Latino students at the Ph.D. level. The Center established and helps administer an interdisciplinary specialization in Latin American, Caribbean and Latino Studies in the Masters of Arts in Liberal Studies program. The Latino Data Project was developed with the goal of making information available on the dynamically growing Latino population of the United States and especially New York City through the analysis of extant data available from a variety of sources such as the U.S. Census Bureau, the National Institute for Health, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and state and local-level data sources. All Latino Data Project reports are available at http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu

For additional information you may contact the Center at 212-817-8438 or by e-mail at [email protected].

Staff: Laird W. Bergad, Distinguished Professor, Department of Latin American, Latino and Puerto Rican

Studies, Lehman College, Ph.D. Program in History, Executive Director, CLACLS Teresita Levy, Associate Professor, Department of Latin American, Latino and Puerto Rican

Studies, Lehman College, Associate Director Mila Burns Nascimento, Administrative Director Lawrence Cappello, Director of Quantitative Research Karen Okigbo, Senior Research Associate Sebastián Villamizar-Santamaría, Research Associate, Webmaster

Copyright @ 2016 Center for Latin American, Caribbean and Latino Studies

Room 5419 Graduate Center

City University of New York 365 Fifth Avenue

New York, New York 10016 212-817-8438

[email protected] http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu/

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Latino Population of New York City, 1990 - 2015 3

Latino Data Project Report 65 December 2016

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 7 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Demography .................................................................................................................................... 9 Citizenship and the Electorate ....................................................................................................... 26 Educational Attainment .................................................................................................................. 31 Income ........................................................................................................................................... 34 Poverty ........................................................................................................................................... 42 Employment and Unemployment ................................................................................................... 47 Language ....................................................................................................................................... 51 Health Insurance ............................................................................................................................ 55 Map Appendix ................................................................................................................................ 57

Guide to Tables

Table 1. New York City Population by Race/Ethnicity 1990 – 2015 ................................................ 10

Table 2. Largest Latino Nationalities in New York City, 1990 – 2015 .............................................. 10

Table 3. Crude Birth Rates and General Fertility Rates by New York City Race/Ethnic Groups and Five Largest Latino Nationalities ....................................................................................... 12

Table 4. Number of Foreign-Born Latinos Living in New York City in 2015 by Time Period of Arrival in the United States by Latino Nationality ...................................................................... 14

Table 5. Foreign and Domestic-Born Components of New York City's Puerto Rican, Mexican, Dominican, Ecuadorian, Colombian and Total Latino Population by Borough, 1990 – 2015 ............................................................................................................................... 15

Table 6. Nativity by Sex of Five Largest Latino National Sub-groups in New York City, 1990 – 2015 ............................................................................................................................... 24

Table 7. Composition of New York City Electorate, 1990 – 2015 .................................................... 28

Table 8. Latino Electorate by Borough and Nationality, 1990 – 2015 .............................................. 30

Table 9. Educational Attainment Rates by Sex and Nativity for Five Largest Latino Nationalities in New York City (population 25 years of age and older), 2015 ................................................ 35



Table 10. Median Household income for Household Heads by Nativity and Sex, New York City 1990 – 2015 ............................................................................................................................... 38

Table 11. Distribution of Household Income by Race/Ethnicity, New York City 1990 – 2015 .......... 40

Table 12. Distribution of Household Income by Latino Nationality, New York City 1990 – 2015 ..... 42

Table 13. Age-Specific Poverty Rates by Race/Ethnicity and Latino Nationality in New York City, 1990 – 2015 ...................................................................................................................... 46

Guide to Figures

Figure 1. Hypothetical Population Projections Among Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, and Mexicans in New York City Using Annual Population Growth Rates between 2000 and 2015 ................................................................................................................................... 11

Figure 2. Number of Foreign-Born Latinos Living in New York City in 2015 by Time Period of Arrival in the United States ....................................................................................................... 13

Figure 3. Foreign-Born Latinos in New York City by Largest Nationalities, 1990 – 2015 ................ 16

Figure 4. Distribution of Latino Population by Borough, 1990 – 2015 ............................................. 16

Figure 5. Percentage of Population of Major Latino Nationalities Living in Each Borough, 2015 ........................................................................................................................................... 17

Figure 6. Percentage of Total Latino Population of Each Borough by Major Latino Nationalities, 2015 .................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 7. Percentage of Total Population of Each Borough which is Latino, 1990 – 2015 .............. 19

Figure 8. Sex Ratios of the Foreign-Born by Largest Latino Nationalities in New York City, 1990 – 2015 ............................................................................................................................... 22

Figure 9. Sex Ratios of the Foreign-Born by Largest Latino Nationalities in New York City Ages 15-45, 1990 – 2015 .......................................................................................................... 23

Figure 10. Median Ages of New York City’s Major Race/Ethnic Groups and Five Largest Latino Nationalities, 2015 .................................................................................................................... 25

Figure 11. Percent of New York City's Major Race/Ethnic Groups and Five Largest Latino Nationalities (Between 0 and 14 years of Age), 2015 ............................................................... 25

Figure 12. Citizenship Status Among New York City Latinos, 1990 – 2015 .................................... 26

Figure 13. Percentage of Latinos who were Not Citizens in New York City by Nationality, 1990 – 2015 ............................................................................................................................... 27



Figure 14. Percentage of Latinos who were Citizens by Birth or Naturalized by Nationality, 1990 - 2015 ............................................................................................................................ 27

Figure 15. Percentage of Electorate who were Latinos by New York City Borough, 1990 – 2015 ................................................................................................................................. 29

Figure 16. Percentage of Population Achieving a B.A. Degree or Higher (population 25 years of age and higher) by Race/Ethnicity, 1990 - 2015 ........................................................ 31

Figure 17. Percentage of Population which did not Graduate High School (population 25 years of age and higher) by Race/Ethnicity, 1990 – 2015 ......................................................... 32

Figure 18. Percentage of Population Achieving a B.A. Degree or Higher (population 25 years of age and higher) by Race/Ethnicity, 1990 – 2015 .......................................................... 32

Figure 19. Percentage of Population which did not Graduate High School (population 25 years of age and higher) by Latino Nationality, 1990 – 2015 ..................................................... 33

Figure 20. Median Household Income by Race/Ethnicity New York City, 1990 – 2015 ................... 34

Figure 21. Median Household Income by Latino Nationality for Domestic Born, New York City, 1990 – 2015 ............................................................................................................................... 36

Figure 22. Median Household Income by Latino Nationality for Foreign Born, New York City, 1990 – 2015 ............................................................................................................................... 37

Figure 23. Percentage of Households Earning Less than $20,000 Annually by Race/Ethnicity in New York City, 1990 – 2015 ................................................................................................. 38

Figure 24. Percentage of Households Earning More than $75,000 Annually by Race Ethnicity in New York City, 1990 – 2015 .................................................................................................. 39

Figure 25. Percentage of Households Earning Less than $20,000 Annually by Latino Nationality in New York City, 1990 – 2015 ................................................................................. 41

Figure 26. Percentage of Households Earning More than $75,000 Annually by Latino Nationality in New York City, 1990 – 2015 ................................................................................. 41

Figure 27. Poverty Rates in New York City by Race/Ethnicity, 1990 – 2015 ................................... 43

Figure 28. Childhood Poverty Rates in New York City by Race/Ethnicity (population 14 years old or under), 1990 – 2015 .......................................................................................... 43

Figure 29. Poverty Rates in New York City by Latino Nationality, 1990 – 2015 .............................. 44

Figure 30. Childhood Poverty Rates in New York City by Latino Nationality (population 14 years old or under), 1990 – 2015 .......................................................................................... 45



Figure 31. Unemployment Rates by Race/Ethnicity New York City (population ages 16 - 60), 1990 – 2015 ............................................................................................................................... 47

Figure 32. Out of the Work Force Rates by Race/Ethnicity New York City (population ages 16 - 60), 1990 – 2015 ........................................................................................................ 48

Figure 33. Unemployment Rates by Latino Nationality New York City, (population ages 16 - 60) 1990 – 2015 ............................................................................................................................... 49

Figure 34. Out of the Work Force Rates by Latino Nationality New York City (population ages 16 - 60), 1990 – 2015 ................................................................................................................ 49

Figure 35. Out of the Work Force Rates by Latino Nationality and Sex New York City (population ages 16 - 60), 1990 - 2010 .................................................................................... 50

Figure 36. English Language Ability for all Latinos in New York City (population 5 Years of age and older), 1990 – 2015 .................................................................................................. 51

Figure 37. Language Spoken at Home for all Latinos in New York City (population 5 Years of age and older), 1990 – 2015 .................................................................................................. 52

Figure 38. Figure 38 English Language Ability for Latinos in New York City by Nationality (population 5 Years of age and older), 1990 – 2010 .................................................................. 53

Figure 39. Language Spoken at Home for Latinos in New York City by Nationality (population 5 Years of age and older), 1990 – 2015 .................................................................. 54

Figure 40. Health Insurance Coverage by Race/Ethnicity New York City, 2015 ............................ 55

Figure 41. Health Insurance Coverage by Latino Nationality New York City, 2015 ........................ 56

Guide to Maps

Map 1. Distribution of Latinos by New York City Census Tracts, 2014 ........................................... 20

Map 2. Latinos as Percentage of Total Populations by New York City Census Tracts, 2014 ......... 21

Map 3. Distribution of Puerto Ricans by New York City Census Tracts, 2014 ................................ 57

Map 4. Distribution of Dominicans by New York City Census Tracts, 2014 ................................... 58

Map 5. Distribution of Mexicans by New York City Census Tracts, 2014 ....................................... 59

Map 6. Distribution of Ecuadorians by New York City Census Tracts, 2014 .................................. 60

Map 7. Distribution of Colombians by New York City Census Tracts, 2014 ................................... 61



Executive Summary • The City’s Latino population continued its steady increase from 1.7 million people and 24% of the

total population in 1990 to over 2.5 million and 29.4% of all New Yorkers in 2015. • Within the Latino population Puerto Ricans declined in absolute and relative terms from 861,000 and

49% of all Latinos the City in 1990 to 701,000 and 28% of the New York’s Latinos in 2015. • Over the same period Dominicans increased in size to become New York City’s largest Latino

nationality. In 1990 there were about 349,000 Dominicans living in the City and they were 20% of all Latinos. By 2015 the Dominican population had more than doubled from 1990 to 723,000 and they comprised 29% of the New York’s Latino population.

• Mexicans were the third largest Latino national subgroup in the City and increased from 58,000 and

3% of all Latinos in 1990 to 377,000 and 15% of the New York’s Hispanic population in 2015. Between 1990 and 2010 Mexicans had been the fastest growing Latino nationality but growth, and probably migration to the City, slowed considerably after 2010.

• There were about 85,000 Ecuadorians in the City in 1990 and they were 5% of all Latinos. By 2015,

largely because of migration, there were 223,000 Ecuadorians in New York and they comprised 9% of the City’s Latinos.

• The Colombian population, the City’s fifth largest nationality grew only slightly from 92,000 and 5%

of all Latinos in New York in 1990 to 102,000 and 4% of all Latinos in 2015. • By 2015 over 32% of the City’s Latinos lived in the Bronx; 26% in Queens, 21% in Brooklyn, 17% in

Manhattan, and only 4% in Staten Island. • About 56% of the total population of the Bronx was of Latino origin in 2015, 28% of Queens, 26% of

Manhattan, 20% of Brooklyn, and 18% of Staten Island. • About 38% of all Puerto Ricans in the City lived in the Bronx while 46% of all Dominicans lived there

in 2015. • About 56% of Ecuadorians and 70% of Colombians lived in Queens in 2015. • Mexicans were concentrated in Queens where 31% lived, Brooklyn 30%, and Manhattan 22%. • There were extraordinary differences in the sex ratios of Latino nationalities in New York City. There

were 139 Mexican men for every 100 women in 2015 and 134 Ecuadorian men for every 100 women in the same year.

• In every other group females were dominant: For Puerto Ricans there were 100 women for every 76

men; 100 women for every 74 male Dominicans; and 100 female Colombians for every 72 males in 2015.

• These data suggest overwhelming female migration for Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, and

Colombians while males dominated migratory flows for Mexicans and Ecuadorians to the City.



• Latinos were the youngest of all race/ethnic groups in the City with a median age of 33 in 2015. Mexicans were the youngest of the Latino nationalities with a median age of 26 followed by Dominicans at 32, Ecuadorians at 33, Puerto Ricans, 37, and Colombians at 41.

• About 77% of all Latinos in the City were citizens because of birth or naturalization in 2015. 59%

were citizens by birth in the U.S. and 18% of the City’s Latinos were naturalized citizens. 23% were not citizens.

• Latinos increased from 18% to 24% of all eligible voters in New York City between 1990 and 2015. • In 1990 70% of the Latino electorate was of Puerto Rican origin and they comprised 13% of the

City’s total eligible voters. But by 2015 Puerto Ricans had declined to 40% of the Latino electorate and 10% of the citizen voting-age population in the City.

• Over the same period Dominicans increased from 10% to 26% of all Latino possible voters and from 2% to 6% of the City’s total electorate.

• Latinos in the City had the lowest college graduation rate of all the race/ethnic groups in 2015 at

17% of all adults 25 years of age and older. But this was a substantial increase from 9% in 1990. • Colombians had a college graduation rate of 27% in 2015 while Puerto Ricans, Dominicans,

Ecuadorians and Mexicans had rates of between 13% and 15%.

• Latinos also had the largest portion of their adult population which had not graduated high school at 34% in 2015, but this was a sharp decline from 51% of non-high school graduates in 1990.

• Latinos had the lowest median household incomes of the City’s race/ethnic groups in 2015 and

experienced a slight increase in median incomes in inflation-adjusted dollars from 1990. • About 34% of all Latino households earned $75,000 or greater in 2015 compared with 60% of non-

Hispanic white households, 49% of Asian households, and 44% of non-Hispanic black households. • More Latinos lived in poverty compared with the City’s other race/ethnic groups (27%) in 2015 but

this was a decline from 33% in 1990. • The childhood poverty rate for Latinos was even higher in 2015 at 37%, but this was a decline from

45% in 1990 • Latinos had unemployment rates at 7% compared with non-Hispanic whites (4%) and blacks (8%)

and Asians (5%) in 2015. • Bilingualism was an integral part of Latino culture in the City as 77% of all Latinos reported good

English language skills in 2015 and 83% reported speaking Spanish at home, a decline from the 88% found in 1990.

• About 86% of all Latinos in the City reported having some kind of health insurance coverage in

2015, although this was lower than the City’s other race/ethnic groups.



Introduction This report is an update to the CLACLS report “The Latino Population of New York City, 1990—2010” issued in November 2011.1 It uses the most current data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2015 American Community Survey released in October 2016. The report examines a wide range of social and economic variables tracing how these changed for Latinos in general within the City in comparison to non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and Asians. It also examines the changes within the five largest Latino nationalities in the City: Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, Ecuadorians, and Colombians. There has been a definitive transformation in Latino New York’s population as without question, according to census data, the Dominican population has surpassed the Puerto Rican population to become New York City’s largest Latino national subgroup.2 Demography Between 1990 and 2015 New York City’s Latino population increased in both absolute terms and as a percentage of New York City’s total population. Although there were fewer Latinos than African Americans in 1990, by 2000 Latinos had become the second most numerous race/ethnic group in the City behind non-Hispanic whites and this continued to 2015 when the city’s over 2.5 million Latinos comprised 29% of New York’s population compared with 22% who were non-Hispanic blacks and 32% who were non-Hispanic whites. (See table 1). Latino annual population growth rates over the period between 1990 and 2015 were significantly higher than those of non-Hispanic whites and blacks, and suggest that in all likelihood Latinos will become the largest race/ethnic group in the City in the near future. This will depend on immigration patterns as well as birth and fertility rates. But the gradual decline of New York City’s non-Hispanic white population and lack of growth among its black population point to the probability that Latinos will surpass both groups in size sometime before 2020. Among Latino national subgroups the trends established after 1990 are very clear. There has been a gradual decline in the City’s Puerto Rican population which accounted for 49% of all Latinos in 1990 and 28% in 2015. Over the same period the Dominican population continued to expand because of ongoing immigration and reproduction and in 2015 made up 29% of the City’s Latino population, its

1 This report may be downloaded at http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu/files/2013/10/The-Latino-Population-of-New-York-City-1990-2010.pdf The current report is based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s Public Use Microdata Series (PUMS) data for 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2015 organized and released by IPUMS USA at the Minnesota Population Center of the University of Minnesota, See Steven Ruggles, Katie Genadek, Ronald Goeken, Josiah Grover, and Matthew Sobek. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 6.0 [Machine-readable database]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2015. Demographic data on Latino nationalities in New York City were generated using the data on Hispanics provided by the Census Bureau as the HISPAND variable and adding data derived from ancestry data of the individual or his/her parents’ place of birth to each national subgroup. CLACLS created a LATINOS variable with the results of this procedure. For technical details of how this was accomplished contact CLACLS.One of the problems in enumerating Hispanics has been a category of people labeled as ‘Other Hispanics’ whose ancestry and nationality is unknown. Using ancestry data the nationality of some of these ’Other Hispanics’ may be determined. 2 CLACLS issued a report in November 2014 which analyzed data suggesting this had occurred by then although the data was not definitive. It is now. See Laird W. Bergad, “Have Dominicans Surpassed Puerto Ricans to become New York City’s Largest Latino Nationality? An Analysis of Latino Population Data from the 2013 American Community Survey for New York City and the Metropolitan Area” available for download at http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu/files/2014/11/AreDominicansLargestLatinoNationality.pdf

http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu/files/2013/10/The-Latino-Population-of-New-York-City-1990-2010.pdf

http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu/files/2013/10/The-Latino-Population-of-New-York-City-1990-2010.pdf

http://clacls.gc.cuny.edu/files/2014/11/AreDominicansLargestLatinoNationality.pdf



Population% of Total Population

% of Total Population

% of Total Population

% of Total

1990-2000

2000-2010

2010-2015

1990-2015

Non-Hispanic White 3,165,172 43.5% 2,810,842 35.1% 2,717,796 33.0% 2,743,091 31.9% -1.2% -0.4% 0.2% -0.6%Non-Hispanic Black 1,863,380 25.6% 1,951,027 24.4% 1,875,108 22.8% 1,878,755 21.9% 0.5% -0.4% 0.0% 0.0%Asian 493,713 6.8% 781,176 9.8% 1,038,369 12.6% 1,202,800 14.0% 4.7% 3.2% 3.0% 3.6%Latino 1,753,456 24.1% 2,226,907 27.8% 2,396,374 29.1% 2,523,116 29.4% 2.4% 0.8% 1.0% 1.5%Other 4,385 0.1% 234,807 2.9% 207,158 2.5% 242,412 2.8% 48.9% -1.4% 3.2% 17.4%

Total 7,280,106 100.0% 8,004,759 100.0% 8,234,805 100.0% 8,590,174 100.0% 1.0% 0.3% 0.8% 0.7%

New York City Population by Race/Ethnicity 1990 - 2015Table 1

1990 2000 2010 Annual Growth Rates2015

Population

% of Total

Latinos Population

% of Total

Latinos Population

% of Total

Latinos Population

% of Total

Latinos1990-2000

2000-2010

2010-2015

1990-2015

Puerto Rican 860,889 49.1% 816,827 36.7% 738,978 30.8% 700,546 27.8% -0.5% -1.1% -1.1% -0.8%Dominican 348,951 19.9% 547,379 24.6% 605,840 25.3% 723,077 28.7% 4.6% 1.1% 3.6% 3.0%Mexican 58,410 3.3% 187,259 8.4% 342,699 14.3% 376,548 14.9% 12.4% 6.9% 1.9% 7.7%Ecuadorian 85,155 4.9% 149,897 6.7% 210,532 8.8% 222,793 8.8% 5.8% 3.8% 1.1% 3.9%Colombian 91,769 5.2% 109,710 4.9% 101,784 4.2% 101,848 4.0% 1.8% -0.8% 0.0% 0.4%Others 308,282 17.6% 415,835 18.7% 396,541 16.5% 398,304 15.8% 3.0% -0.5% 0.1% 1.0%

Total 1,753,456 100.0% 2,226,907 100.0% 2,396,374 100.0% 2,523,116 100.0% 2.4% 0.8% 1.0% 1.5%

Largest Latino Nationalities in New York City, 1990 - 2015Table 2

1990 2000 2010 2015 Annual Population Growth Rates

largest contingent. Between 1990 and 2010 Mexicans had been the City’s fastest growing Latino nationality, but growth slowed after 2010, in all likelihood because of a decrease in migration to the City from Mexico and from other parts of the U.S. But even by 2000 Mexicans were the third largest Latino nationality in the City and in 2015 Mexican-origin persons were 15% of all New York City’s Latinos. (See table 2).

If annual population growth rates between 2000 and 2015 are used to calculate the future national distribution of New York City’s Latino population, Dominicans will continue to grow meteorically, Puerto Ricans will continue to decline in the City, and Mexicans will surpass Puerto Ricans in about 2036 to become the City’s second largest Latino national sub group. There are no assurances that these annual population growth rates will continue into the future as migration and reproductive rates will inevitably change. (See figure 1). These conclusions are substantially different from those indicated in the 2011 report which projected that Mexicans would become the City’s largest Latino nationality based on growth rates among Mexicans between 2000 and 2010. These rates have slowed considerably.



2015

2017

2019

2021

2023

2025

2027

2029

2031

2033

2035

2037

2039

2041

2043

2045

2047

2049

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

Puerto Ricans Dominicans Mexicans

Figure 1Hypothetical Population Projections Among Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, and Mexicans in New York City

Using Annual Population Growth Rates between 2000 and 2015

The continued increase in the City’s Latino population was closely connected to relatively high birth rates and ongoing immigration. Two general demographic indicators, the crude birth rate and the general fertility rate, demonstrate that reproductive rates among New York City’s Hispanics were similar to those found among non-Hispanic whites and blacks and were lower than for Asians.3 In 2015 the crude birth rate for New York City’s Latinos was 14 compared with 13 for non-Hispanic blacks and 15 for non-Hispanic whites. The general fertility rate for City Latinos was 62 compared with 56 for non-Hispanic blacks and 68 for non-Hispanic whites in 2010. (See table 3). The difference between Latinos and the other major race/ethnic groups are that there has been continued migration to New York City from Latin America and the Caribbean, especially from the Dominican Republic, Mexico, and Ecuador.4 Mexicans, Dominicans, and Ecuadorians had the highest natural reproductive rates compared with Puerto Ricans and Colombians who had significantly lower crude birth and general fertility rates.

3 The crude birth rate is the number of live births in a given year per 1,000 people. The general fertility rate is the number of live births in a year divided by the number of women aged 15–44, times 1000. Data on population were derived from the ACS 2015 population files. Data on live births were drawn from Table PO2 and PO3, p. 73, Bureau of Vital Statistics, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Summary of Vital Statistics 2014 The City of New York available on the internet at: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/vs/2014sum.pdf 4 The crude birth rate among Latinos in New York City declined from 17 to 14 between 2010 and 2015 and the general fertility rate fell from 70 to 62. These trends are important to take note of and may suggest increased utilization of family planning among the City’s Latino population.

https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/vs/2014sum.pdf



Race/Ethnic Group/Latino Nationality

Crude Birth Rate

General Fertility

Rate

Non-Hispanic White 15 68Non-Hispanic Black 13 56Latino 14 62Asian 17 69

Puerto Rican 11 51Dominican 18 64Mexican 19 71Ecuadorian 15 69Colombian 11 51

Table 3Crude Birth Rates and General Fertility

Rates by New York City Race/Ethnic Groupsand Five Largest Latino Nationalities, 2015

It also should be noted that although Latinos made up 29% of the City’s total population, when the City’s youth are examined, Latinos comprised 36% of all people 18 years of age and younger in 2015 compared with 26% for non-Hispanic whites; 23% for non-Hispanic blacks; and 12% Asians. The implications of this for public education are monumental as Latinos comprised the largest segment of the City’s school-age children, something that will increase in the future because of migration and reproduction. Latinos continued to arrive in the U.S. and settle in New York City in increasing numbers each decade after 1950 as suggested by the number of foreign-born Latinos living in the City in 2015. By 2015 about 43% of the Latino population was foreign born including Puerto Ricans born on the island. Although the national groupings changed over time, more Latinos living in the City arrived in the United States between 2000 and 2009 than in any prior decade. Between 2000 and 2009 these data suggest that about 31,720 Latinos arrived annually, although this declined to 28,826 yearly between 2010 and 2015. These data must be used with caution because they do not measure migration, but rather the numbers of foreign-born Latinos living in the City and their years of arrival. (See figure 2). There was, of course, a great deal of variation in the periodization of immigration to the U.S. among the City’s Latinos by nationality as suggested by the foreign-born Latino population in the City in 2015. Among the five major Latino national subgroups Puerto Rican migration peaked in the 1950s and 1960s and then declined. Dominicans have been the largest group arriving in the City in every decade and period after 1970 and if the arrival data are examined after 2010 Dominicans are the only Latino nationality which did not experience a decline in yearly arrivals after the 2000-2009 decade.



20,250

58,259

107,828128,053

235,951

302,168317,204

148,958

Before 1950 1950-59 1960-69 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99 2000-09 2010-2015

Figure 2Number of Foreign-Born Latinos Living in New York City in 2015

by Time Period of Arrival in the United States

Note: These data include Puerto Ricans born in Puerto Rico. The total number of foreign-born Latinos living in New York City in 2015, including island-born Puerto Ricans was 1,077,424.

More Mexicans and Ecuadorians arrived in New York after 2000 than in prior decades but it is apparent that after 2010 yearly arrivals among these national groups clearly declined. (See table 4). Yet, there were some major transformations occurring after 2000 when the nativity of the City’s Latino population is considered. For the very first time since the end of the Second World War the absolute number of foreign-born Latinos, combined with island-born Puerto Ricans, declined and population growth was fueled increasingly by the expansion of U.S.-born Latinos. Between 1990 and 2000 the foreign-born Latino population increased from 962,155 to 1,239,140 for a net gain of 276,985 people. However, between 2000 and 2010, despite the continued arrival of significant numbers of Mexicans, Dominicans, and Ecuadorians among others, New York City’s foreign-born Latino population increased marginally in absolute terms by only about 2,400 people. These trends continued and in 2015 for the very first time the number of foreign-born Latinos in the City had declined from 2010 (1,241,569) to 1,077,424 in 2015. Additionally, foreign-born Latinos fell from about 52% of the total Hispanic population in 2010 to 43% in 2015. This means that foreign-born Latinos, in all likelihood an older segment of the population, had begun to gradually leave the City for surrounding suburban communities, they died, or they moved elsewhere in the U.S. or perhaps back to their home countries in relatively small numbers. The implications of this reversal for the future, if this trend holds, is that second, third, and subsequent generations of Latinos born in the U.S. will became demographically dominant in absolute and relative numbers, despite ongoing migration. This may have an extraordinary impact on socioeconomic indicators among the overall Latino population since domestic-born Latinos tend to demonstrate higher incomes, better educational attainment



MexicansPuerto Ricans Colombians Ecuadorians Dominicans

Other Latinos All Latinos

Before 1950 250 17,204 371 1,187 1,238 20,250 1950-59 753 44,139 440 1,261 3,218 8,448 58,259 1960-69 1,459 44,891 7,422 10,228 22,769 21,059 107,828 1970-79 5,085 29,598 10,209 14,897 40,985 27,279 128,053 1980-89 28,626 27,100 15,184 29,059 84,828 51,154 235,951 1990-99 63,698 17,517 17,907 36,644 110,620 55,782 302,168 2000-09 80,613 13,969 18,328 45,707 104,146 54,441 317,204 2010-15 16,810 4,957 7,205 16,920 76,948 26,118 148,958

Total 197,294 199,375 76,695 155,087 444,701 245,519 1,318,671

1950-59 84 4,904 49 140 358 939 6,473 1960-69 162 4,988 825 1,136 2,530 2,340 11,981 1970-79 565 3,289 1,134 1,655 4,554 3,031 14,228 1980-89 3,181 3,011 1,687 3,229 9,425 5,684 26,217 1990-99 7,078 1,946 1,990 4,072 12,291 6,198 33,574 2000-09 8,957 1,552 2,036 5,079 11,572 6,049 35,245 2010-15 2,802 826 1,201 2,820 12,825 4,353 24,826

Note: For Puerto Ricans 'foreign-born' means born on the island.

Table 4Number of Foreign-Born Latinos Living in New York City in 2015 by Time Period

of Arrival in the United States by Latino Nationality

Yearly Arrival Data for Foreign-Born Latinos

levels, and lower poverty rates than their foreign-born counterparts. These indicators will be considered below. (See figure 3 for data on foreign-born Latinos by nationality).

Table 5 presents a very detailed portrayal of the changes in the foreign-born and domestic-born population of the five largest Latino nationalities in the City by borough. These dense data are provided for reference use by scholars and others.



1990

2000

2010

2015

Nat

iona

lity

Bor

ough

Dom

estic

- B

orn

For

eign

- B

orn

Tota

lD

omes

tic-

Bor

nF

orei

gn-

Bor

nTo

tal

Dom

estic

- B

orn

For

eign

- B

orn

Tota

lD

omes

tic-

Bor

nF

orei

gn-

Bor

nTo

tal

% o

f P

opul

atio

n F

orei

gn

Bor

n

% o

f P

opul

atio

n F

orei

gn

Bor

n

% o

f P

opul

atio

n F

orei

gn

Bor

n

% o

f P

opul

atio

n F

orei

gn

Bor

n

Pue

rto

Ric

anB

ronx

190,

418

14

6,17

3

336,

591

207,

678

12

3,57

3

33

1,25

1

20

4,75

7

90

,818

295,

575

197,

409

71,3

09

26

8,71

8

43

.4%

37.3

%30

.7%

26.5

%M

anha

ttan

79,7

87

66

,470

146,

257

76,2

34

53

,961

13

0,19

5

76

,546

31

,523

108,

069

77,9

58

32,7

06

11

0,66

4

45

.4%

41.4

%29

.2%

29.6

%S

tate

n Is

land

13,6

99

5,

197

18,8

96

23,6

07

6,

559

30,1

66

30,5

75

7,46

2

38,0

37

36,7

85

5,73

1

42,5

16

27.5

%21

.7%

19.6

%13

.5%

Bro

okly

n15

4,31

8

107,

650

26

1,96

8

13

2,68

2

83,6

76

216,

358

128,

405

53,3

13

18

1,71

8

11

4,14

5

47

,356

161,

501

41.1

%38

.7%

29.3

%29

.3%

Que

ens

60,1

66

37

,011

97,1

77

75,0

10

33

,847

10

8,85

7

86

,238

29

,341

115,

579

98,0

27

19,1

20

11

7,14

7

38

.1%

31.1

%25

.4%

16.3

%To

tal

498,

388

36

2,50

1

860,

889

515,

211

30

1,61

6

81

6,82

7

52

6,52

1

21

2,45

7

73

8,97

8

52

4,32

4

17

6,22

2

70

0,54

6

42

.1%

36.9

%28

.8%

25.2

%

Dom

inic

anB

ronx

26,8

56

64

,021

90,8

77

53,1

59

13

0,19

8

18

3,35

7

83

,813

16

3,47

8

24

7,29

1

12

8,72

9

20

6,54

2

33

5,27

1

70

.4%

71.0

%66

.1%

61.6

%M

anha

ttan

42,1

27

94

,855

136,

982

57,3

78

12

9,34

4

18

6,72

2

55

,026

10

7,98

9

16

3,01

5

63

,620

11

2,99

4

17

6,61

4

69

.2%

69.3

%66

.2%

64.0

%S

tate

n Is

land

646

697

1,34

3

86

2

1,

126

1,98

8

1,79

6

1,22

5

3,02

1

3,30

7

4,32

8

7,63

5

51.9

%56

.6%

40.5

%56

.7%

Bro

okly

n17

,028

38,2

97

55

,325

25

,702

58,2

19

83,9

21

33,1

73

62,9

84

96

,157

40

,881

63

,773

104,

654

69.2

%69

.4%

65.5

%60

.9%

Que

ens

17,9

13

35

,031

52,9

44

31,0

11

60

,380

91

,391

44

,776

51

,580

96,3

56

42,4

14

56,4

89

98

,903

66

.2%

66.1

%53

.5%

57.1

%To

tal

104,

570

23

2,90

1

337,

471

168,

112

37

9,26

7

54

7,37

9

21

8,58

4

38

7,25

6

60

5,84

0

27

8,95

1

44

4,12

6

72

3,07

7

69

.0%

69.3

%63

.9%

61.4

%

Mex

ican

Bro

nx3,

848

7,83

5

11

,683

11

,622

23,8

75

35,4

97

34,8

83

53,3

62

88

,245

43

,862

40

,007

83,8

69

67.1

%67

.3%

60.5

%47

.7%

Man

hatt

an4,

365

5,90

6

10

,271

11

,150

19,9

09

31,0

59

21,0

09

22,7

57

43

,766

26

,762

19

,151

45,9

13

57.5

%64

.1%

52.0

%41

.7%

Sta

ten

Isla

nd96

6

77

5

1,

741

2,65

5

4,

943

7,59

8

8,30

9

7,74

5

16,0

54

11,4

77

5,85

8

17,3

35

44.5

%65

.1%

48.2

%33

.8%

Bro

okly

n6,

955

12,2

89

19

,244

18

,794

42,0

93

60,8

87

45,6

48

55,8

85

10

1,53

3

57

,843

56

,184

114,

027

63.9

%69

.1%

55.0

%49

.3%

Que

ens

3,83

0

9,

175

13,0

05

15,0

25

37

,193

52

,218

35

,482

57

,619

93,1

01

47,5

67

67,8

37

11

5,40

4

70

.5%

71.2

%61

.9%

58.8

%To

tal

19,9

64

35

,980

55,9

44

59,2

46

12

8,01

3

18

7,25

9

14

5,33

1

19

7,36

8

34

2,69

9

18

7,51

1

18

9,03

7

37

6,54

8

64

.3%

68.4

%57

.6%

50.2

%

Ecu

ador

ian

Bro

nx3,

996

8,28

1

12

,277

5,

677

15,2

48

20,9

25

14,1

95

24,3

39

38

,534

16

,873

25

,664

42,5

37

67.5

%72

.9%

63.2

%60

.3%

Man

hatt

an3,

117

9,98

9

13

,106

4,

873

12,5

56

17,4

29

6,41

1

15,7

51

22

,162

7,

041

14

,391

21,4

32

76.2

%72

.0%

71.1

%67

.1%

Sta

ten

Isla

nd16

5

31

2

47

7

662

965

1,

627

3,

064

1,

649

4,

713

3,

034

2,

179

5,

213

65

.4%

59.3

%35

.0%

41.8

%B

rook

lyn

4,84

4

13

,690

18,5

34

7,26

8

20

,014

27

,282

13

,961

26

,266

40,2

27

13,1

39

17,7

09

30

,848

73

.9%

73.4

%65

.3%

57.4

%Q

ueen

s9,

508

27,5

32

37

,040

18

,464

64,1

70

82,6

34

31,0

31

73,8

65

10

4,89

6

41

,702

81

,061

122,

763

74.3

%77

.7%

70.4

%66

.0%

Tota

l21

,630

59,8

04

81

,434

36

,944

112,

953

149,

897

68,6

62

141,

870

210,

532

81,7

89

141,

004

222,

793

73.4

%75

.4%

67.4

%63

.3%

Col

ombi

anB

ronx

890

2,28

3

3,

173

1,26

6

3,

307

4,57

3

1,79

4

4,00

7

5,80

1

2,31

9

2,68

9

5,00

8

72.0

%72

.3%

69.1

%53

.7%

Man

hatt

an1,

862

6,12

3

7,

985

2,05

3

5,

753

7,80

6

4,09

3

6,57

6

10,6

69

4,04

6

7,06

0

11,1

06

76.7

%73

.7%

61.6

%63

.6%

Sta

ten

Isla

nd31

8

1,

100

1,41

8

69

2

1,

240

1,93

2

1,11

2

1,44

4

2,55

6

1,72

6

1,87

6

3,60

2

77.6

%64

.2%

56.5

%52

.1%

Bro

okly

n2,

707

8,75

8

11

,465

2,

969

8,57

6

11

,545

4,

402

6,

998

11

,400

4,

551

6,

107

10

,658

76

.4%

74.3

%61

.4%

57.3

%Q

ueen

s14

,221

50,5

18

64

,739

17

,938

65,9

16

83,8

54

22,8

86

48,4

72

71

,358

20

,744

50

,730

71,4

74

78.0

%78

.6%

67.9

%71

.0%

Tota

l19

,998

68,7

82

88

,780

24

,918

84,7

92

109,

710

34,2

87

67,4

97

10

1,78

4

33

,386

68

,462

101,

848

77.5

%77

.3%

66.3

%67

.2%

Tota

l Lat

inos

Bro

nx24

4,94

7

258,

773

50

3,72

0

32

7,83

9

331,

993

659,

832

375,

372

378,

514

753,

886

491,

962

317,

169

809,

131

51.4

%50

.3%

50.2

%39

.2%

Man

hatt

an14

9,93

3

224,

703

37

4,63

6

18

4,78

5

258,

987

443,

772

191,

353

219,

898

411,

251

244,

765

187,

599

432,

364

60.0

%58

.4%

53.5

%43

.4%

Sta

ten

Isla

nd18

,516

11,4

90

30

,006

34

,465

20,7

68

55,2

33

54,3

73

25,9

51

80

,324

68

,898

18

,902

87,8

00

38.3

%37

.6%

32.3

%21

.5%

Bro

okly

n21

0,03

0

232,

916

44

2,94

6

22

8,51

0

269,

625

498,

135

260,

634

259,

282

519,

916

322,

649

204,

192

526,

841

52.6

%54

.1%

49.9

%38

.8%

Que

ens

132,

311

23

4,27

3

366,

584

212,

168

35

7,76

7

56

9,93

5

27

2,74

0

35

7,92

4

63

0,66

4

31

7,24

8

34

9,56

2

66

6,81

0

63

.9%

62.8

%56

.8%

52.4

%To

tal

755,

737

96

2,15

5

1,71

7,89

2

987,

767

1,

239,

140

2,

226,

907

1,

154,

472

1,

241,

569

2,

396,

041

1,

445,

522

1,

077,

424

2,

522,

946

56

.0%

55.6

%51

.8%

42.7

%

Not

e: D

iscr

epen

cies

in to

tal p

opul

atio

n fig

ures

with

Tab

le 1

are

due

to th

e fa

ct th

at th

ere

wer

e so

me

case

s w

ithin

eac

h na

tiona

lity

whe

re b

irthp

lace

may

hav

e be

enun

know

n. C

ases

with

in e

ach

natio

nalit

y w

here

birt

hpla

ce m

ay h

ave

been

unk

now

n. F

or P

uert

o R

ican

s, fo

reig

n-bo

rn m

eans

bor

n in

Pue

rto

Ric

o.

Tabl

e 5

For

eign

and

Dom

estic

-Bor

n C

ompo

nent

s of

New

Yor

k C

ity's

Pue

rto

Ric

an, M

exic

an, D

omin

ican

,E

cuad

oria

n, C

olom

bian

and

Tot

al L

atin

o P

opul

atio

n by

Bor

ough

, 199

0 - 2

015

1990

2000

2010

2015



25%

61%

50%

63%67%

43%

29%

64%

58%

67% 66%

52%

37%

69% 68%

75% 77%

56%

42%

69%64%

73%78%

56%

Puerto Ricans Dominicans Mexicans Ecuadorians Colombians All Latinos

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 3Foreign-Born Latinos in New York City by Largest Nationalities, 1990 - 2015

(in percentages of total populations)

Note: For Puerto Ricans foreign-born means born in Puerto Rico.

2% 3% 3% 4%

22%20%

17% 17%

26%

22% 22% 21%22%

26% 26% 26%29% 30%

32% 32%

1990 2000 2010 2015

BronxQueens

Brooklyn Manhattan Staten Island

Figure 4Distribution of Latino Population by Borough, 1990 - 2015

The spatial distribution of the City’s Latinos gradually shifted between 1990 and 2015. By 2015 about 80% of all Latinos lived in the Bronx (32%), Queens (26%), and Brooklyn (21%). Manhattan experienced a relative decline from 22% of all Latinos in 2000 to 17% in 2015, while Staten Island accounted for a very small percentage of all Latinos over the entire period and only 4% in 2015. (See figure 4).



17%14%

31%

55%

70%

23%

14%

30%

14%10%

6%

1%5%

2%4%

16%

24%

12%10% 11%

38%

46%

22%19%

5%

Puerto Ricans Dominicans Mexicans Ecuadorians Colombians

BronxManhattan

Staten Island Brooklyn Queens

Figure 5Percentage of Population of Major Latino Nationalities Living in Each Borough, 2015

The concentration of Latino populations throughout the city is depicted in Maps1 and 2. Bronx neighborhoods, with the exception of Riverdale, were heavily Latino as were the northern Manhattan neighborhoods of Inwood/Washington Heights and East Harlem. In Queens, Jackson Heights, Elmhurst, East Elmhurst, and Corona have had large concentrations of Latinos from the 1980s. In Brooklyn, North and South Bushwick and East and West Sunset Park were neighborhoods with dense Latino populations. There were, of course, varied patterns of population concentration by Latino nationalities and these are indicated in figure 5. About 38% of all Puerto Ricans and 46% of all Dominicans in the City lived in the Bronx by 2015. For Dominicans the second largest borough of residence was Manhattan where 24% of all Dominicans lived, concentrated in Washington Heights. For Puerto Ricans, Brooklyn (23%) was the second largest borough of population concentration. Mexicans were concentrated in Queens (31%) and Brooklyn (30%), Queens, and the Bronx (22%). Ecuadorians were heavily concentrated in Queens where 55% of the City’s Ecuadorian population lived. Colombians were the most concentrated of all the Latino national subgroups with 70% living in Queens. (See maps 3 through 7 in the map appendix, p. 57). In the Bronx 41% of all Latinos living there were Dominicans while 33% were Puerto Ricans in 2015. Puerto Ricans were dominant in Brooklyn where they comprised 31% of all Latinos with Mexicans at 22%, and Dominicans at 20%. Queens was the most diversified of all the boroughs in 2015 with respect to Latino national subgroups as Puerto Ricans and Ecuadorians, the largest groups, accounted for 18% each of the total Latino population. At 41% of all Latinos in Manhattan, Dominicans were the borough's largest Latino contingent in 2015 followed by Puerto Ricans at 26%. (See figure 6).



1%3% 4%

2%

11%

5% 5% 6% 6%

18%

10% 11%

20%22%

17%

41% 41%

9%

20%

15%

33%

26%

48%

31%

18%

Bronx Manhattan Staten Island Brooklyn Queens

Puerto RicansDominicans

Mexicans Ecuadorians Colombians

Figure 6Percentage of Total Latino Population of Each Borough by Major Latino Nationalities, 2015

The Bronx experienced a fairly significant demographic transformation between 1990 and 2015 as the Latino population surged. There were a little over 500,000 Latinos living in the borough in 1990 accounting for about 43% of all Bronx residents. By 2015 56% of the Bronx’s population was comprised of Latinos — about 809,000 people. This was largely due to the large-scale relocation of the Dominican population from upper Manhattan, and the arrival of Mexicans to the Bronx. In 1990 41% of all Dominicans in the City lived in Manhattan and 27% lived in the Bronx. By 2015 these relative proportions had been inverted — 46% of all New York City Dominicans lived in the Bronx and 24% in Manhattan. There had been a net gain of over 244,000 Dominicans in the Bronx between 1900 and 2015. The other major Latino nationality which heavily contributed to the increase in the Bronx’s population was Mexicans. Although the City’s Mexican population was greater in Brooklyn and Queens by 2015, there was a net gain of over 72,000 Mexicans in the Bronx between 1990 and 2015. Over the same period the Bronx’s Puerto Rican population declined by nearly 68,000. (See table 5 above for these data). See figure 7 for the percentage of each borough’s population which was Latino between 1990 and 2015.



56%

26%

18%20%

28%

54%

26%

17%21%

28%

49%

29%

12%

20%

26%

43%

26%

8%

20% 20%


1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 7Percentage of Total Population of Each Borough which is Latino, 1990 - 2015

There were significant differences in the sex ratios among the foreign born when the largest Latino nationalities in the City are compared. These ratios, which are expressed in the number of males per 100 females, suggest very distinctive patterns of migration by sex and nationality. Among Mexicans there was a very clear preponderance of males who arrived and lived in New York City among the overall Mexican population and also in the working age category, or persons between 15 and 45 years of age. In 1990 there were 163 males for every 100 females among New York City’s Mexican population. The ratio fell to 152 in 2000, 142 in 2010, and 139 in 2015. Among 15 to 45 year olds, there were 149 male Mexicans for every 100 female Mexicans in 2015 indicating the overwhelming predominance of males among Mexican migrants to the City. The only other Latino nationality in which more men than women were evident was among foreign-born Ecuadorians, although male dominance was not as pronounced. In fact in 1990 there was parity by sex among Ecuadorians who had arrived in the City from Ecuador as the sex ratio was 99. But by 2000 this ratio was 115 declining slightly to 113 in 2010. By 2015 the sex ratio among foreign-born Ecuadorians increased once again to 124. This suggests that after 1990 more male Ecuadorians arrived in the City than females. Within the 15-45 year old age category the sex ratio among Ecuadorians was 150 in 2015 which supports the conclusion that more male than female migrants arrived in the City since most migrants fell into this age category.



80 8071 7478 74 77 76

8575 71 72

99

115 113124

163152

142 139

1990 2000 2010 2015

MexicansEcuadorians

Colombians Puerto Ricans Dominicans

Figure 8Sex Ratios of the Foreign-Born by Largest Latino Nationalities in New York City, 1990 - 2015

(males per 100 females)

Note: For Puerto Ricans these data are for those born in Puerto Rico.

However, Mexicans and Ecuadorians were the only Latino national subgroups demonstrating male demographic majorities. Among Colombians, Dominicans, and Puerto Ricans females prevailed by large margins among those who were foreign born, or in the case of Puerto Ricans those born on the island. This means unequivocally that women migrants predominated. The sex ratio was 85 among foreign-born Colombians in 1990 and 72 in 2015 or 72 males for every 100 females. Among foreign-born Dominicans the sex ratio was even more extreme: it was 80 in 199, fell to 71 in 2010, and then increased slightly to 74 in 2015. Among island-born Puerto Ricans, the sex ratio was 78 in 1990 and 76 in 2015. Clearly Dominican, Colombian, and Puerto Rican migrants coming to New York City were predominantly women. These data are summarized in figures 8 and 9. Complete data on domestic and foreign born persons are provided in table 6.



92 87

70

99

82 82 78 8381 7889

77

108

133 133

150

177

159152 149

1990 2000 2010 2015

MexicansEcuadorians

Puerto Ricans Dominicans Colombians

Figure 9Sex Ratios of the Foreign-Born by Largest Latino Nationalities in New York City, 1990 - 2015

Ages 15 - 45 (males per 100 females)

Note: For Puerto Ricans these data are for those born in Puerto Rico.

Latinos were the youngest of the major race/ethnic groups in the City. In 2015 they had a median age of 33 compared with 40 among non-Hispanic whites; 40 among non-Hispanic blacks; and 38 among Asians. There were, however, differences in the age structures of the five largest Latino national subgroups. Mexicans, with their high birth and fertility rates, were the youngest with a median age of 26. They were followed by Dominicans at 32; Ecuadorians, 33; Puerto Ricans, 37; and Colombians at 41, the oldest of all Latino nationalities. Additionally, Latinos had the greatest concentrations of people under 15 years of age among the City’s major race/ethnic groups although there were considerable variations by Latino nationality with Mexicans having the largest proportion of their populations between 0 and 14 years of age at 30% in 2015. (See figures 10 and 11).



1990

Domestic-Born

Males

Domesitc Born

Females

Total Domestic

Born

Foreign-Born

Males

Foreign-Born

Females

Total Foreign

BornTotal

Population

Mexicans 10,372 9,592 35,980 22,295 13,685 35,980 71,960 Colombians 10,628 9,370 19,998 31,558 37,224 68,782 88,780 Ecuadorians 10,950 10,680 21,630 29,762 30,042 59,804 81,434 Dominicans 52,745 51,825 104,570 103,236 129,665 232,901 337,471 Puerto Ricans 242,895 255,493 498,388 159,319 203,182 362,501 860,889

2000

Domestic-Born

Males

Domesitc- Born

Females

Total Domestic

Born

Foreign-Born

Males

Foreign-Born

Females

Total Foreign

BornTotal

Population


2010

Domestic-Born

Males

Domesitc Born

Females

Total Domestic

Born

Foreign-Born

Males

Foreign-Born

Females

Total Foreign

BornTotal

Population


2015

Domestic-Born

Males

Domesitc Born

Females

Total Domestic

Born

Foreign-Born

Males

Foreign-Born

Females

Total Foreign

BornTotal

Population


Note: For Puerto Ricans foreign-born means born in Puerto Rico.

Table 6Nativity by Sex of Five Largest Latino National Sub-groups in New York City, 1990 - 2015



15%

15%

18%

22%

30%

20%

21%

23%

13%

NH Whites

Asians

NH Blacks

Latinos

Mexicans

Puerto Ricans

Dominicans

Ecuadorians

Colombians

Figure 11Percent of New York City's Major Race/Ethnic Groups and Five Largest Latino Nationalities

between 0 and 14 years of Age, 2015

40

40

38

33

26

32

33

37

41

NH Whites

NH Blacks

Asians

Latinos

Mexican

Dominican

Ecuadorian

Puerto Rican

Colombian

Figure 10Median Ages of New York City's Major Race/Ethnic Groups and Five Largest Latino Nationalities

2015



77%

59%

18%

23%

74%

58%

16%

26%

73%

59%

14%

27%

74%

64%

10%

26%

Total Citizens Citizen by Birth Naturalized Citizen Not a Citizen

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 12Citizenship Status Among New York City Latinos, 1990 - 2015

(in percentage of all Latinos)

Citizenship and the Electorate The percentage of Latinos who were U.S. citizens in New York City increased slightly from 74% in 1990 to 77% in 2015. The constant arrival of foreign-born migrants offset the numbers of domestic-born Latinos who were citizens by birth so that the ratios of citizens to non-citizens remained at about 3 to 1. What changed was an increase in the relative proportion of all Latinos who were naturalized citizens. In 1990 about 10% of New York City’s Latino population were naturalized citizens; 18% in 2015. (See figure 12). With the exception of the Mexican population, with its large foreign-born influx, there were sharp declines in the non-citizenship rate among Colombians (from 58% in 1990 to 27% in 2015); Ecuadorians (58% in 1990 to 39% in 2015); and Dominicans (51% in 1990 to 29% in 2015). These declines were the result of a combination of births in the U.S. and naturalization. (See figures 13 and 14). Puerto Ricans, of course, are all citizens by birth.



50%

34%

38%41%

8%

40%

23%

30%

43%

34% 34%

38%

6%

35%

23%

28%

33%

24%25%

32%

7%

31%

23% 25%

36%

23%27%

32%

11%

18%15%

18%

Mex

ican

s

Col

ombi

ans

Ecu

ador

ians

Dom

inic

ans

Mex

ican

s

Col

ombi

ans

Ecu

ador

ians

Dom

inic

ans

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 14Percentage of Latinos who were Citizens by Birth or Naturalized by Nationality, 1990 - 2015

(in percentage of all Latinos in each nationality)

23%

41%

27%

39%

29%26%

51%

30%

43%

34%

27%

61%

45%

51%

44%

26%

53%

58% 58%

51%

All Latinos Mexicans Colombians Ecuadorians Dominicans

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 13Percentage of Latinos who were Not Citizens in New York City by Nationality, 1990 - 2015



1990 2000 2010 2015 1990 2000 2010 2015

Non-Hispanic White 2,470,830 2,085,379 2,075,323 2,063,496 54.1% 44.5% 40.9% 38.0%Non-Hispanic Black 1,097,530 1,164,353 1,203,686 1,269,691 24.0% 24.8% 23.7% 23.4%Asian 164,534 308,327 504,625 635,466 3.6% 6.6% 9.9% 11.7%Latino 829,615 1,018,383 1,174,188 1,324,425 18.2% 21.7% 23.1% 24.4%Other 5,801 110,895 116,557 134,948 0.1% 2.4% 2.3% 2.5%

Total 4,568,310 4,687,337 5,074,379 5,428,026 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Population

Table 7Composition of New York City Electorate, 1990 - 2015

(citizens 18 years of age and older)

% of Total

Even though there was little transformation in the relative rates of citizenships among Latinos, there was a substantial increase in the absolute number of citizens who were Latinos. This had an important impact on the shape of the New York City electorate, defined as citizens 18 years of age and older and thus eligible to vote. The most important trend in the City’s electorate after 1990 was the relative decline of non-Hispanic whites from 54% of all City eligible voters in 1990 to 38% in 2015 and the increase in the percentage of Latinos from 18% of the NYC electorate in 1990 to 24% in 2015. Non-Hispanic blacks remained about the same at 23% of all eligible voters and Asians increased from 4% to 12% of the City’s electorate between 1990 and 2015, another important development which should be noted. (See table 7).

Latinos made up about one-fifth of all eligible voters in Manhattan (22%) and Queens (23%) in 2015, 17% in Brooklyn, and 15% in Staten Island, a major rise from the 6% found in 1990. But the Bronx stands out as the one borough where Latinos are poised to become the majority of the electorate. In 1990 37% of eligible voters in the Bronx were Hispanics; 50% in 2015. (See figure 15).

The Latino electorate itself was transformed because of the demographic shifts among the City’s Latinos outlined above. The most important trend was the relative decline of Puerto Ricans as a percentage of all Latino voters and the rise of Dominicans. In 1990 70% of the Latino electorate was of Puerto Rican origin and they comprised 13% of the City’s total eligible voters. But by 2015 Puerto Ricans had declined to 40% of the Latino electorate and 10% of the citizen voting-age population in the City. Over the same period Dominicans increased from 10% to 26% of all Latino possible voters and from 2% to 6% of the City’s total electorate.



50%

22%

15% 17%

23%

46%

20%

13%

17%

22%

43%

21%

9%

17% 18%

37%

17%

6%

17%

12%


1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 15Percentage of Electorate who were Latinos by New York City Borough, 1990 - 2015

The decline of Puerto Ricans in their relative strength as voters was also reflected at the borough level. In the Bronx 83% of all Latinos eligible to vote in 1990 were Puerto Ricans; 47% in 2015. In Manhattan they were 61% of the Latino electorate in 1990; 35% in 2015. Brooklyn and Queens also experienced the relative decline of the Puerto Rican electorate as well. (See table 8). This process was paralleled by the relative increase of Dominicans: from 8% to 36% in the Bronx between 1990 and 2015; 17% to 36% in Manhattan over the same period; 5% to 18% in Brooklyn. It was only in Queens that Ecuadorians (13%) and Colombians (13%) were a potential major electoral force and Mexicans still have had a fairly small presence as eligible voters, their peak at 10% of all eligible Latino voters in Brooklyn in 2015.



Bronx ManhattanStaten Island Brooklyn Queens

Mexicans 1.2% 2.5% 3.9% 2.3% 2.0%Puerto Ricans 83.0% 61.3% 70.3% 74.5% 46.5%Colombians 0.3% 1.6% 1.7% 1.3% 10.2%Ecuadorians 1.0% 1.8% 0.6% 1.6% 5.3%Dominicans 7.8% 17.2% 3.4% 5.8% 10.8%Others 6.7% 15.5% 20.1% 14.6% 25.1%







2015

2010

Table 8Latino Electorate by Borough and Nationality, 1990 - 2015

(in percentages of total Latinos eligible to vote)

1990

2000



57%

24%

42%

17%

52%

20%

40%

15%

42%

16%

36%

11%

32%

13%

34%

9%

Non-Hispanic WhitesNon-Hispanic Blacks

AsiansLatinos

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 16Percentage of Population Achieving a B.A. Degree or Higher, 1990 - 2015

by Race/Ethnicity (population 25 years of age and higher)

Educational Attainment In general terms Latinos collectively were the poorest educated of the City’s major race/ethnic groups from 1990 to 2015 although there was some evidence of improvement. By 2015 17% of Latino adults 25 years of age or older had graduated college compared with 57% of non-Hispanic whites, 42% of Asians, and 24% of non-Hispanic blacks. Additionally 34% of Hispanic adults had not graduated high school compared with 25% of Asians, 17% of non-Hispanic blacks, and only 7% of non-Hispanic whites. Nevertheless the college graduation rate for Latinos had increased from 9% in 1990 and the non-high school graduation rate had fallen from an extraordinary 51% in 1990 to 34% in 2015. (See figures 16 and 17). The general educational trends when the Latino nationalities are examined individually are similar. With the exception of Mexicans who were impacted by the arrival of large number of poorly educated foreign-born migrants, each of the other four of the City’s largest Latino national subgroups experienced significant improvements in college graduation rates. Puerto Ricans and Dominicans, each had 15% of their adult populations having attained a B.A. degree or higher by 2015 and these rates were major improvements from 1990. Mexicans at 13% and Ecuadorians at 14% in 2015 were similar. Colombians stand out for the comparatively high rate of college graduation — 27% in 2015. (See figure 18).



7%

17%

25%

34%

9%

19%

25%

37%

15%

28%31%

46%

22%

34%31%

51%


AsiansLatinos

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 17Percentage of Population which did not Graduate High School, 1990 - 2015

by Race/Ethnicity (population 25 years of age and higher)

15% 15%13% 14%

27%

13% 13%12%

13%

24%

9% 9% 9% 10%

17%

6% 6%

14%

8%

10%


1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 18Percentage of Population Achieving a B.A. Degree or Higher, 1990 - 2015

by Latino Nationality (population 25 years of age and higher)



29%

40%

44%

37%

20%

36%

40%

51%

38%

22%

45%

54%

59%

45%

34%

54%

60%

53%

47%

41%


1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 19Percentage of Population which did not Graduate High School, 1990 - 2015

by Latino Nationality (population 25 years of age and higher)

The high school graduation rate also improved but those who had not graduated high school remained an appallingly high percentage of each nationality with the exception of Colombians. Puerto Ricans experienced a significant fall in the rate of non-high school graduation from 54% in 1990 to 29% in 2015. For Dominicans the drop was from an astounding 60% in 1990 to a still very high 40% in 2015, about the same rate as found among Ecuadorians (37%) in the same year. The arrival of so many foreign-born Mexicans meant that non-high school graduation rates were extraordinarily high although there was some improvement: 53% in 1990 and 44% in 2015. (See figure 19). Yet, these general rates mask the extraordinary differentiations found when these data are parsed by sex and nativity. The greatest factor was nativity. Domestic-born Latinos among the five largest national subgroups had college graduation rates in 2015 which dwarfed those of their foreign-born counterparts, even among the poorest educated groups when total populations over 25 years of age are considered. For example, only about 13% of all Mexican adults had graduated college in 2015. But in the same year 44% of domestic-born Mexican males and 42% of domestic-born females had achieved a B.A. degree or higher. Additionally, in an astounding 66% of all domestic-born Mexican males and 71% of females had some college, an Associate degree, or had achieved a B.A. Only 6% of foreign-born Mexican males and 9% of females had attained a B.A. degree or higher in 2015.



$94,000

$65,000

$72,000

$50,630

$88,617

$57,770

$66,490

$49,377

$81,750

$54,500

$65,264

$46,748

$81,112

$57,732

$69,469

$46,236

Non-Hispanic Whites

Non-Hispanic Blacks

Asians

Latinos

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 20Median Household Income by Race/Ethnicity New York City, 1990 - 2015

(in inflation adjusted 2015 dollars)

For each nationality there were similar, but not verbatim patterns, although what is most impressive is the college graduation rate for domestic-born females. Among Dominicans 28% of adult women had achieved a B.A. degree or higher by 2015 compared with 22% of domestic-born Dominican men. Some 39% of Ecuadorian domestic-born women had graduated college compared with 33% of men. For Colombians, 32% of U.S. born women and 28% of men had completed a college education. Puerto Ricans had the lowest college graduation rates. Among U.S.-born Puerto Rican women 22% had completed a B.A. degree compared with 15% of men. Additionally, 71% of domestic-born adult Mexican women had attended some college, achieved an Associates or B.A. degree or higher compared with 68% of men in 2015. For Puerto Rican stateside-born women 55% had at least attended college or graduated with degrees compared with 45% of men. For Colombians 56% of men and 56% of women born in the U.S. had at least attended some college. For Ecuadorians 64% of domestic-born women and 71% of domestic-born men had attended college or graduated with A.A. or B.A. degrees or higher in 2015. (These data are found in table 9). Income Latinos had the lowest median household incomes in New York City from 1990 to 2015 compared with the other major race/ethnic groups, and there was only marginal improvement in these medians when inflation is factored in. In fact, the failure to increase median incomes significantly was similar to Asians and non-Hispanic blacks. Only non-Hispanic whites experienced significant increases in real income between 1990 and 2015. (See figure 20).



Nationality Education Attainment Level

Domestic-Born

Males

Foreign-Born

Males

Domestic-Born

Females

Foreign-Born

Females

Mexicans Did Not Graduate High School 11.3% 49.7% 9.3% 51.7%High School Graduate 22.5% 35.3% 19.5% 30.3%Some College No Degree 16.2% 8.1% 23.6% 7.4%Associates Degree 5.7% 0.9% 5.4% 1.6%BA or Higher 44.3% 6.0% 42.1% 9.0%

Some College, AA, or B.A. degree or higher 66.2% 15.0% 71.2% 18.0%Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

.Puerto Ricans Did Not Graduate High School 19.4% 47.9% 17.8% 45.4%

High School Graduate 35.2% 28.1% 26.7% 28.3%Some College No Degree 22.6% 10.5% 22.7% 13.8%Associates Degree 7.7% 3.8% 11.0% 3.5%BA or Higher 15.1% 9.8% 21.8% 9.1%


Colombians Did Not Graduate High School 12.2% 22.1% 14.7% 21.7%High School Graduate 31.8% 25.0% 29.2% 33.0%Some College No Degree 23.4% 16.5% 13.2% 16.2%Associates Degree 4.9% 5.9% 10.7% 4.7%BA or Higher 27.8% 30.5% 32.3% 24.4%


Ecuadorians Did Not Graduate High School 11.2% 41.7% 8.6% 38.7%High School Graduate 17.8% 31.9% 27.7% 28.0%Some College No Degree 30.5% 14.7% 17.4% 13.8%Associates Degree 7.3% 3.3% 7.9% 6.2%BA or Higher 33.2% 8.3% 38.6% 13.2%


Dominicans Did Not Graduate High School 20.2% 45.9% 15.1% 43.8%High School Graduate 29.8% 25.3% 19.4% 22.9%Some College No Degree 23.8% 12.0% 21.4% 14.0%Associates Degree 4.5% 4.4% 16.4% 6.8%BA or Higher 21.7% 12.5% 27.7% 12.6%


Note: For Puerto Ricans 'foreign-born' means born on the island.

Table 9Educational Attainment Rates by Sex and Nativity for Five Largest Latino Nationalities in New York City, 2015

(population 25 years of age and older)



$42,000

$60,000

$87,500

$56,400

$44,600

$47,851

$42,510

$76,409

$63,656

$45,562

$49,050

$40,875

$58,724

$57,225

$40,194

$56,653

$39,567

$57,912

$49,882

$34,358

Mexican

Puerto Rican

Colombian

Ecuadorian

Dominican

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 21Median Household Income by Latino Nationality for Domestic Born, New York City, 1990 - 2015


However, once again nativity was an important variable in measuring median incomes. With the exception of Mexicans, who experienced a decline in median household incomes if they were domestic born, Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, Ecuadorians, and Colombians born in the U.S. had increases in real median incomes after 1990 although there were declines between 2000 and 2015 for Ecuadorians and a slight decline for Dominicans. (See figure 21). However, for foreign-born Latino households in the five most numerous nationalities, not only were median incomes much lower in absolute terms than found among the U.S. born, but there was little improvement between 1990 and 2010. This suggests that foreign-born Latinos arriving in New York City had lower skill levels and educational attainment. It also indicates that it was difficult in general for foreign-born Latinos to acquire higher-paying jobs because of poor preparation to compete in labor markets. (See figure 22). If household heads are considered by both nativity and sex not only did males earn higher incomes than females whether domestic or foreign born, but domestic-born males and females always had median household incomes which were greater than the foreign born. (Complete data are provided in table 10). When the distribution of household income is delineated by income categories Latinos had the greatest concentrations of households earning less than $20,000 annually and the smallest proportion of overall New York City households earning more than $75,000 annually than the other race/ethnic groups. Some 19% of all Latino households earned less than $20,000 in 2015, an improvement from the 26% found in 1990. In 2015 15% of non-Hispanic black households, 10% of Asian, and 9% of non-Hispanic white households were found in this lower-income category. (See figure 23).



$51,700

$34,400

$60,000

$57,200

$38,320

$55,500

$35,409

$64,436

$66,600

$44,622

$56,888

$42,555

$58,691

$60,218

$45,649

$63,370

$60,440

$58,672

$58,608

$43,802

Mexican

Puerto Rican

Colombian

Ecuadorian

Dominican

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 22Median Household Income by Latino Nationality for Foreign Born, New York City, 1990 - 2015


9%

15%

10%

19%

11%

18%

14%

22%

12%

21%

14%

24%

11%

20%

11%

26%


AsiansLatinos

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 23Percentage of Households Earning Less than $20,000 Annually by Race/Ethnicity

in New York City, 1990 - 2015 (in inflation adjusted 2015 dollars)



Male Female Male Female

Mexican 60,440$ 53,571$ 54,945$ 41,850$ Puerto Rican 45,183$ 40,293$ 45,788$ 32,092$ Colombian 70,330$ 64,233$ 58,608$ 40,244$ Ecuadorian 36,630$ 27,147$ 57,692$ 36,384$ Dominican 65,934$ 29,304$ 49,451$ 23,810$







2015Domestic Born Foreign Born

Table 10Median Household income for Household Headsby Nativity and Sex, New York City 1990 - 2015

1990

Domestic Born Foreign Born


Domestic Born Foreign Born

2000Domestic Born Foreign Born

2010



60%

44%

49%

34%

54%

35%

42%

29%

50%

32%

40%

25%

50%

35%

42%

24%


AsiansLatinos

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 24Percentage of Households Earning More than $75,000 Annually by Race Ethnicity


There was a relative increase in the percentage of all Latino households earning more than $75,000 from 1990 (24%) to 2015 (34%). However, these percentages were much lower than non-Hispanic black households in which about a third were in this income category between 1990 (35%) and 2015 (44%). In 2015 60% of non-Hispanic white households and 49% of the City’s Asian households earned $75,000 or greater. (See figure 24 and table 11 for complete income distribution data by category and race/ethnicity between 1990 and 2015). Puerto Ricans and Dominicans were the City’s poorest Latino national subgroups and this was despite the arrival of so many foreign-born Mexican immigrants between 1990 and 2015. Additionally, they had smaller percentages of their households in the upper income-earning categories. Some 23% of Puerto Rican and 24% of Dominican households earned incomes of less than $20,000 in 2015 while for Mexicans, Ecuadorians, and Colombians between 11 and 14% of less of all households were in this category. In the $75,000 and over category there were fewer relative households among Puerto Ricans (37%), Dominicans (26%), and Mexicans (29%) than Ecuadorians (38%) and Colombians (47%). (See figures 25 and 26 and table 12 for complete data). These data on income distribution structures underline the fact that it is impossible to generalize about “Latinos” in the City and that even references to particular nationalities as if they were homogeneous are difficult. This is because of a clear social structure within all Latinos and each nationality based on income. There were wealthy Latinos, even if they were not as wealthy as non-Hispanic whites, poor Latinos mired in poverty, and there were those at varying income levels in the middle.



1990 2000 2010 2015 1990 2000 2010 2015

Less than 10,000 4.2% 4.3% 3.5% 3.1% 10.5% 11.4% 8.4% 6.5%10,000-19,999 7.2% 8.0% 7.9% 6.1% 9.1% 9.5% 9.9% 8.9%20,000-29,999 6.3% 6.6% 7.2% 6.4% 8.7% 9.1% 10.3% 8.2%30,000-39,999 6.8% 7.3% 6.8% 5.7% 10.1% 10.4% 9.7% 8.2%40,000-49,999 7.9% 6.7% 6.6% 5.1% 9.1% 8.9% 9.1% 7.3%50,000-74,999 18.0% 16.8% 14.2% 14.0% 17.9% 18.3% 17.1% 17.1%75,000-99,999 15.2% 13.9% 12.3% 12.2% 13.7% 12.7% 11.1% 13.1%100,000 - 199,999 25.1% 25.1% 25.4% 29.7% 16.7% 16.8% 17.6% 24.9%200,000 + 9.4% 11.3% 16.2% 17.8% 4.1% 2.9% 6.8% 5.8%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

1990 2000 2010 2015 1990 2000 2010 2015

Less than 10,000 3.9% 4.1% 3.9% 3.1% 12.5% 11.7% 9.3% 7.6%10,000-19,999 6.8% 9.5% 9.9% 7.3% 13.7% 12.5% 13.0% 11.5%20,000-29,999 8.9% 9.9% 10.3% 9.2% 10.8% 11.2% 11.8% 10.9%30,000-39,999 9.5% 9.5% 9.1% 9.4% 10.7% 11.2% 10.5% 10.7%40,000-49,999 9.6% 8.8% 8.0% 6.7% 10.1% 9.8% 9.0% 8.3%50,000-74,999 19.0% 18.1% 17.1% 15.6% 18.1% 18.6% 17.2% 16.8%75,000-99,999 16.0% 13.0% 13.0% 11.5% 11.0% 11.2% 9.6% 11.3%100,000 - 199,999 21.5% 20.9% 21.6% 25.6% 10.8% 11.7% 14.5% 18.3%200,000 + 4.8% 6.1% 7.1% 11.6% 2.2% 2.0% 5.1% 4.6%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Non-Hispanic Whites Non-Hispanic Blacks

Asians Latinos

Table 11Distribution of Household Income by Race/Ethnicity New York City 1990 - 2015

(in percentages of all households and in inflation adjusted 2015 dollars)



23%24%

14%13%

11%

30%

24%

17%

13% 14%

32%

25%

16%

13% 13%

33%

29%

11%

17%

11%


1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 25Percentage of Households Earning Less than $20,000 Annually by Latino Nationality


37%

26%

29%

38%

47%

28%

21%

30%

37% 38%

23%21%

28%

33% 32%

21%18%

37%

31% 31%


1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 26Percentage of Households Earning More than $75,000 Annually by Latino Nationality




1990 2000 2010 2015 1990 2000 2010 2015 1990 2000 2010 2015

Less than 10,000 17.0% 16.9% 15.1% 10.9% 12.5% 11.7% 9.3% 8.7% 3.7% 4.5% 5.4% 3.1%10,000-19,999 15.8% 14.8% 15.3% 12.2% 16.6% 13.3% 14.3% 15.4% 7.7% 8.3% 8.2% 7.8%20,000-29,999 10.6% 10.9% 11.2% 8.4% 12.3% 12.5% 12.9% 13.9% 10.9% 9.8% 11.3% 8.3%30,000-39,999 9.7% 9.8% 9.1% 9.3% 11.8% 12.5% 12.3% 11.5% 11.4% 11.4% 9.4% 10.3%40,000-49,999 9.1% 8.7% 7.7% 8.1% 11.0% 11.2% 11.0% 8.5% 11.9% 11.8% 6.0% 7.6%50,000-74,999 16.6% 16.0% 13.3% 14.5% 17.5% 18.1% 19.3% 16.3% 23.2% 22.0% 21.2% 16.0%75,000-99,999 10.2% 10.6% 8.6% 11.0% 8.9% 9.8% 8.1% 9.2% 14.6% 12.5% 11.1% 13.4%100,000 - 199,999 9.1% 10.8% 13.1% 20.8% 8.3% 9.2% 10.3% 13.9% 14.8% 16.1% 21.9% 25.4%200,000 + 2.0% 1.4% 6.5% 4.8% 1.1% 1.7% 2.5% 2.6% 1.8% 3.6% 5.4% 8.0%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

1990 2000 2010 2015 1990 2000 2010 2015

Less than 10,000 4.4% 6.0% 4.4% 4.6% 5.6% 5.2% 3.6% 5.0%10,000-19,999 6.6% 10.0% 12.6% 9.5% 11.1% 8.2% 9.4% 7.8%20,000-29,999 10.2% 11.2% 12.9% 15.5% 9.8% 10.6% 10.8% 10.0%30,000-39,999 11.2% 12.6% 12.4% 14.8% 10.8% 10.8% 8.8% 8.7%40,000-49,999 11.7% 10.2% 9.6% 7.5% 10.3% 10.3% 9.7% 10.8%50,000-74,999 18.7% 21.6% 18.2% 19.0% 21.1% 22.2% 21.0% 19.9%75,000-99,999 16.1% 13.3% 9.9% 11.2% 13.3% 16.4% 11.0% 14.9%100,000 - 199,999 17.2% 13.3% 15.6% 13.7% 16.8% 14.9% 21.9% 19.1%200,000 + 3.9% 1.9% 4.5% 4.1% 1.2% 1.5% 3.8% 3.7%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Mexicans Ecuadorians

Table 12Distribution of Household Income by Latino Nationality, New York City, 1990 - 2015

(in percentages of all households and in inflation adjusted 2015 dollars)

Puerto Ricans Dominicans Colombians

Poverty Although poverty rates declined from one-third of all Latinos in 1990 to 27% in 2015, the Hispanic population of New York City had the highest poverty rates of any of the major race/ethnic groups. Nevertheless these had fallen from 33% in 1990. For non-Hispanic whites the rate was 12% in 2015; 20% for non-Hispanic blacks; and 16% for Asians. (See figure 27). Worse still, the poverty rates for Latino children 14 years of age and younger were the highest in the City at 37% in 2015 although there had been a decline from an astronomical 45% in 1990. In 2015 this compared with a childhood poverty rate of 18% for non-Hispanic whites, 27% for non-Hispanic blacks, and 19% for Asian children. (See figure 28).



12%

20%

16%

27%

13%

24%

19%

29%

14%

26%

20%

32%

11%

25%

16%

33%


AsiansLatinos

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 27Poverty Rates in New York City by Race/Ethnicity, 1990 - 2015

18%

27%

19%

37%

20%

34%

24%

40%

17%

35%

23%

41%

14%

35%

17%

45%


AsiansLatinos

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 28Childhood Poverty Rates in New York City by Race/Ethnicity, 1990 - 2015

(population 14 years old or under)



29%

33% 33%

22%

19%

36%

28%

32%

20%

16%

36%

33% 34%

23%21%

39%38%

25%

21%

16%


1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 29Poverty Rates in New York City by Latino Nationality, 1990 - 2015

Among the five major Latino nationalities there was a marginal decline an important decline in the poverty rates for Puerto Ricans from 39% in 1990 to 29% in 2015. Ecuadorians and Colombians between 1990 and 2015 experienced slight increases in overall poverty; an increase among Mexican households from 25% in 1990 to 33% in 2015; and a decline among Dominicans from 38% to 33% although there was increase in poverty between 2010 and 2015. Ecuadorians (22%) and Colombians (19%) had significantly lower poverty rates than the three other Latino national subgroups in 2015. (See figure 29). Childhood poverty rates were near catastrophic for Puerto Ricans in 1990 at 52% but fell dramatically between 2010 and 2015 to 31%, although the particular reasons are not clear. Childhood poverty among Mexicans was the highest in the City among Latinos at 48% in 2015 while Dominicans had 43% of all children living in poverty compared with 32% of Ecuadorian children and a rate of 27% for Colombians in 2015. (See figure 30). Complete age-specific poverty rates from 1990 - 2015 are found in Table 13. These childhood poverty rates are cause for great alarm.



31%

43%

48%

32%

27%

49%

38%

43%

32%

21%

46%43%

42%

28%

25%

52% 51%

34%31%

20%


1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 30Childhood Poverty Rates in New York City by Latino Nationality, 1990 - 2015

(population 14 years old or under)



0-14 15-44 45-59 60 +Non-Hispanic Whites 14.1% 9.7% 7.0% 13.0%Non-Hispanic Blacks 34.9% 22.9% 15.9% 26.1%Asians 17.3% 16.3% 11.7% 18.3%Latinos 45.4% 29.7% 22.5% 29.6%




0-14 15-44 45-59 60 +Mexicans 33.6% 21.8% 16.8% 25.6%Puerto Ricans 51.8% 35.0% 27.4% 36.2%Colombians 19.6% 15.9% 11.0% 21.2%Ecuadorians 30.8% 17.9% 11.9% 23.1%Dominicans 50.7% 33.9% 26.2% 27.9%




2015

1990

2000

2010

Table 13Age-Specific Poverty Rates by Race/Ethnicity and

Latino Nationality in New York City, 1990 - 2015

1990

2000

2010

2015



4%

8%

5%

7%6%

11%

7%

9%

4%

9%

4%

8%

4%

9%

5%

9%


AsiansLatinos

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 31Unemployment Rates by Race/Ethnicity New York City, 1990 - 2015

(population ages 16 - 60)

Employment and Unemployment Measuring unemployment is not as straight forward as it may appear because unemployment rates are calculated considering only those people who are actively seeking work. In order to evaluate labor markets it is important to also consider those people who are designated as out of the work force regardless of reason, and to focus upon the core of the working age population — individuals between ages 16 and 60. The U.S. Census Bureau does not delineate the precise reasons that people are not seeking work. Latinos in New York City had an unemployment rate in 2015 at 7% a marked improvement from the 9% of 2010 and a testimony to the economic recovery of the Obama presidency. This compared with unemployment among non-Hispanic blacks at 8%, non-Hispanic whites (4%) and Asians at 5%. (See figure 31). The Latino ‘out-of-the-workforce’ rate in 2015 of 28% marks a decrease from the 31% of Latinos not seeking work in 2010. For non-Hispanic whites the rate was 21%, the lowest in New York City; for non-Hispanic blacks it was 28%, the same as for Latinos; for Asians the out-of-the workforce rate was also 28% in 2015. (See figure 32). There was a striking similarity among all race and ethnic groups in the City with respect to those who were not looking for jobs, although the precise reasons are not indicated by these data.



21%

28% 28% 28%

23%

30% 29%31%

26%

35%33%

41%

23%

30%

26%

36%


AsiansLatinos

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 32Out of the Work Force Rates by Race/Ethnicity New York City, 1990 - 2015


Mexicans and Ecuadorians had the lowest unemployment rates among the largest Latino nationalities in the City at 4% in 2015. Puerto Ricans and Colombians had unemployment rates of 7% each, significant declines from 2010, followed by Dominicans at 8%, also a major decrease from the 11% found in 2010. (See figure 33). There were sharp differences in the out of the work force rate in 2015. Puerto Ricans (35%) had the highest rate well above Dominicans (28%), Mexicans (27%), Ecuadorians (22%), and Colombians (20%), (See figure 34). When these data are analyzed by sex the differentials among males were even more exaggerated. Some 34% of all Puerto Rican men between the ages of 16 and 60 were out of the work force in 2015 and 24% of Dominican males were also not looking for work. This may be contrasted with Mexican males (14%), Ecuadorians (14%), and Colombians at 15% in 2015 between 16 and 60 years of age who were not seeking employment. For women, however, Mexicans had the highest out of the work force rates at 42% in 2015 compared with 36% of Puerto Rican women. About 31% of Dominican women were not seeking work; for Ecuadorian females the rate was 32%. For Colombian women it was 24%. The precise reasons for these differentials by sex are not revealed by the extant data. However, given the high birth and fertility rates for Mexican women discussed previously it is likely that their high out of the work force rate may be linked to greater child-care responsibilities than among the other Latino nationalities. The high out of the work force rate among Puerto Rican and Dominican males is a topic which deserves more detailed consideration using sources that are not available from the U.S. Census Bureau. (See figure 35).



4%

7% 7%

4%

8%

6%

11%

9%

7%

11%

7%

9%

7% 7%

9%

7%

8% 8% 8%

11%

Mexicans Puerto Ricans Colombians Ecuadorians Dominicans

1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 33Unemployment Rates by Latino Nationality New York City, 1990 - 2015


27%

35%

20%22%

28%28%

40%

23%

26%

29%

39%

44%

35%37%

43%

24%

42%

25% 25%

38%


1990 2000 2010 2015

Figure 34Out of the Work Force Rates by Latino Nationality New York City, 1990 - 2015




14%

34%

15% 14%

24%

14%

39%

14%16%

25%27%

38%

29% 29%

38%

13%

29%

14%12%

25%


Figure 35Out of the Work Force Rates by Latino Nationality and Sex New York City, 1990 - 2010


42%

36%

24%

32%31%

46%

40%

29%

38%

33%

55%

49%

40%

46%48%

41%

53%

34%37%

48%


Males

Females



76% 75% 76% 77%

25% 25% 24% 23%

1990 2000 2010 2015

Does not Speak English or Does not Speak Well Speaks only English, well or very well

Figure 36English Language Ability for all Latinos in New York City, 1990 - 2015

Population 5 Years of Age and Older

Language Because of the large influx of foreign-born migrants from Mexico, Ecuador, and the Dominican Republic the percentage of Latinos who spoke English well, very well, or exclusively did not change very much between 1990 and 2015, hovering around three-quarters of the City’s total Latino population. (See figure 36). Over the same period there was a slight drop in the dominant language spoken at home by all Latinos from the 88% of all households who spoke predominantly Spanish in 1990 to 83% in which Spanish was the dominant language in 2015. Thus, bilingualism was a prominent trait within New York’s Latino communities as a large proportion of Latinos spoke English with competency but generally spoke Spanish at home. (See figure 37). However, with the fluctuations in migration patterns there were variations when the largest nationalities are considered.



88% 86%82% 83%

11% 14%17% 17%

1990 2000 2010 2015

English Spanish

Figure 37Language Spoken at Home for all Latinos in New York City, 1990 - 2015


There were gradual improvements in English language skills among the other major Latino national subgroups between 1990 and 2015 in the City. Among Puerto Ricans 92% reported speaking English well or better in 2015; the rate was 78% for Colombians; and about two-thirds of all Dominicans and Ecuadorians had good English language abilities. For Mexicans the rate in 2015 was 71% a significant increase from 1990. Each of the latter three groups had about a third of their overall populations who did not speak English well or at all. (See figure 38). Bilingualism, indicated by the use of Spanish at home, was the norm for all national groups, although Puerto Ricans stand out because of a significant decline in the use of Spanish at home. In 1990 87% of all Puerto Rican households used Spanish as the dominant language at home even though 84% reported good English language skills. But by 2015 68% of all Puerto Ricans reported speaking Spanish at home with 92% reporting good English language skills. From another perspective about one-third of Puerto Ricans reported speaking English at home in 2015. Puerto Ricans, of course, are the oldest Latino national sub group in the City, and as more and more Puerto Ricans are born in the U.S. and as there has been a secular decrease in the number of Puerto Ricans born on the island living in the City, it is apparent that a major change has been underway in language choice at home. It is likely that this pattern will eventually be reproduced in the future with other Latino nationalities — the predominance of bilingualism but with a gradually increasing percentage of households using English at home especially among those who were born in the U.S. (See figure 39). Indeed among Puerto Ricans born on the U.S. mainland, 20% reported speaking English at home in 1990 and 41% in 2015.



92%

66%71%

67%

78%

89%

67%64% 64%

77%

87%

65%

56%

63%67%

84%

61%59%

65%68%

Figure 38English Language Ability for Latinos in New York City by Nationality, 1990 - 2010


8%

34%

29%

33%

22%

11%

33%36% 36%

23%

13%

36%

44%

37%

33%

16%

39%41%

36%

32%


1990 2000 2010 2015

Speaks only English, Well or Very Well

Does not Speak English or Does not Speak Well



32%

7%

12%

7%

12%

29%

6%

13%

7%9%

19%

7%

11%

5%6%

13%

5%

18%

5% 6%

Figure 39Language Spoken at Home for Latinos in New York City by Nationality, 1990 - 2015


68%

93%88%

93%88%

71%

94%

87%93% 91%

81%

93%89%

95% 94%

87%

95%

81%

95% 94%


1990 2000 2010 2015

English

Spanish



14%

86%

10%

90%

9%

91%

5%

95%

No Health Insurance Health Insurance

Non-Hispanic Whites Non-Hispanic Blacks Asians Latinos

Figure 40Health Insurance Coverage by Race/Ethnicity New York City, 2015

(in percentage of total populations)

Health Insurance The 2015 American Community Survey data have included information on health insurance coverage, as this has become a political and health issue of national importance. In New York City Latinos had the highest rate of uninsured people compared with the other race/ethnic groups at 14%, although a fairly high percentage had some kind of insurance (86%). (See figure 40). Puerto Ricans were the most covered nationality with 94% possessing some kind of health coverage, while Mexicans were the group with the lowest percentage of insured persons at 68%. There was clearly a direct correlation between those nationalities which had greater percentages of their overall populations who had arrived recently and lower rates of health insurance coverage. Ecuadorians, the second most numerous group of recently arrived migrants also had the second lowest rate of health insurance coverage at 76%. (See figure 41 for complete data).



13%

87%

24%

76%

32%

68%

9%

91%

6%

94%

No Health Insurance Health Insurance

Puerto RicansDomincians

Mexicans Ecuadorians Colombians

Figure 41Health Insurance Coverage by Latino Nationality New York City, 2015



Bronx

Queens

Brooklyn

Manhattan

Staten Island

Map 3: Distribution of Puerto Ricans by New York City Census Tracts, 2014

Map Appendix



Bronx

Queens

Brooklyn

Manhattan

Staten Island

Map 4: Distribution of Dominicans by New York City Census Tracts, 2014



Bronx

Queens

Brooklyn

Manhattan

Staten Island

Map 5: Distribution of Mexicans by New York City Census Tracts, 2014



Bronx

Queens

Brooklyn

Manhattan

Staten Island

Map 6: Distribution of Ecuadorians by New York City Census Tracts, 2014



Bronx

Queens

Brooklyn

Manhattan

Staten Island

Map 7: Distribution of Colombians by New York City Census Tracts, 2014

the latino population of new york city 1990 –...

Documents