Visit coronavirus.gov for the latest Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) updates.

You are here

Adolescent Health Data Details

Expand All

  • AH-1 Increase the proportion of adolescents who have had a wellness checkup in the past 12 months

    About the Data

    Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

    Data Source: 
    National Health Interview Survey
    Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
    No
    Measure: 
    percent
    Baseline (Year): 
    68.7 (2008)
    Target: 
    75.6
    Target-Setting Method: 
    10 percent improvement
    Numerator: 

    Number of adolescents aged 10 to 17 years who received a wellness checkup during the past 12 months when not sick or injured

    Denominator: 

    Number of adolescents aged 10 -17 years

    Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
    Not applicable
    Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

      From the 2008 National Health Interview Survey:

      [NUMERATOR:]

      DURING THE PAST 12 MONTHS, did [fill1: alias] receive a well-child check-up, that is a general check-up, when [fill2: he/she] was not sick or injured?

      1. Yes
      2. No
      3. Refused
      4. Don't know
    Data Collection Frequency: 
    Annual
    Trend Issues: 
    Beginning with 2018, the American Community Survey questions are no longer available in the NHIS. As a result, tabulated data by disability are discontinued after 2017.
  • AH-2 Increase the proportion of adolescents who participate in extracurricular and/or out-of-school activities

    About the Data: National

    Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

    Data Source: 
    National Survey of Children's Health
    Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
    Yes
    Measure: 
    percent
    Baseline (Year): 
    82.4 (2007)
    Target: 
    90.6
    Target-Setting Method: 
    10 percent improvement
    Numerator: 

    Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years participating in one or more organized extra-curricular and/or out-of-school activities

    Denominator: 

    Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years

    Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
    Not applicable
    Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

      From the 2007 National Survey of Children's Health:

      [NUMERATOR:]

      During the past 12 months, was [S.C.] on a sports team or did [he/she] take sports lessons after school or on weekends?

      1. YES
      2. NO
      3. DON’T KNOW
      4. REFUSED

      During the past 12 months, did [he/she] participate in any clubs or organizations after school or on weekends?

      1. YES
      2. NO
      3. DON’T KNOW
      4. REFUSED

      During the past 12 months, did [he/she] participate in any other organized events or activities?

      1. YES
      2. NO
      3. DON’T KNOW
      4. REFUSED
    Data Collection Frequency: 
    Periodic
    Methodology Notes: 

      Responses to the three questions were combined into a single indicator that included 12 to 17 year olds who participated in one or more organized activities. In 2007, the third question was asked if the respondent answered "no" to the other two questions. In the 2011/12 survey, the third question was revised to "During the past 12 months, did [he/she] participate in any other organized activities or lessons, such as music, dance, language, or other arts?," and asked of all children.

      Children with special health care needs are identified by parents’ reports that their child has a health problem expected to last at least 12 months and which requires prescription medication, more services than most children, special therapies, or which limits his or her ability to do things most children can do.

    Trend Issues: 
    The 2011/12 survey included the addition of cell phones to the sample. This has implications for the comparability of items between 2007 and 2011/12.

    About the Data: State

    Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the state-level data.

    Data Source: 
    National Survey of Children's Health
    Measure: 
    percent
    Numerator: 

    Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years participating in one or more organized extra-curricular and/or out-of-school activities

    Denominator: 

    Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years

    Questions Used to Obtain the State Data: 

        From the 2007 National Survey of Children's Health:

        [NUMERATOR:]

        During the past 12 months, was [S.C.] on a sports team or did [he/she] take sports lessons after school or on weekends?

        1. YES
        2. NO
        3. DON’T KNOW
        4. REFUSED

        During the past 12 months, did [he/she] participate in any clubs or organizations after school or on weekends?

        1. YES
        2. NO
        3. DON’T KNOW
        4. REFUSED

        During the past 12 months, did [he/she] participate in any other organized events or activities?

        1. YES
        2. NO
        3. DON’T KNOW
        4. REFUSED
    Data Collection Frequency: 
    Periodic
    Methodology Notes: 

        Responses to the three questions were combined into a single indicator that included 12 to 17 year olds who participated in one or more organized activities. In 2007, the third question was asked if the respondent answered "no" to the other two questions. In the 2011/12 survey, the third question was revised to "During the past 12 months, did [he/she] participate in any other organized activities or lessons, such as music, dance, language, or other arts?," and asked of all children.

        Children with special health care needs are identified by parents’ reports that their child has a health problem expected to last at least 12 months and which requires prescription medication, more services than most children, special therapies, or which limits his or her ability to do things most children can do.

    Trend Issues: 
    The 2011/12 survey included the addition of cell phones to the sample. This has implications for the comparability of items between 2007 and 2011/12.

    Revision History

    Any change to the objective text, baseline, target, target-setting method or data source since the Healthy People 2020 launch.

    Description of Changes Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
    In 2012, the original baseline was revised from 82.5 to 82.4 percent due to a change in the rounding method used. At launch conventional rounding was used for the displayed baseline; however Healthy People 2020 is using the 'round half to evens' rule for the display values this decade. The target was adjusted from 90.8 to 90.6 percent to reflect the revised baseline using the original target-setting method. There was a change in the way questions are asked in the 2011/12 survey. In 2007, the question, "During the past 12 months, did [he/she] participate in any other organized events or activities?" was only asked of children with a "no" response to both of the other two numerator questions listed. In 2011 it was asked for all children. Also in 2011, the wording of the question was changed to read, "During the past 12 months, did [he/she] participate in any other organized activities or lessons, such as music, dance, language, or other arts?"
  • AH-3 Increase the proportion of adolescents who are connected to a parent or other positive adult caregiver

    • AH-3.1 Increase the proportion of adolescents who have an adult in their lives with whom they can talk about serious problems

      About the Data: National

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

      Data Source: 
      National Survey on Drug Use and Health
      Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      Yes
      Measure: 
      percent
      Baseline (Year): 
      75.6 (2008)
      Target: 
      83.2
      Target-Setting Method: 
      10 percent improvement
      Numerator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years who have an adult in their lives with whom they can talk about serious problems

      Denominator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years

      Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
      Not applicable
      Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

        From the 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health:

        [NUMERATOR:]

        If you wanted to talk to someone about a serious problem, which of the following people would you turn to?

        1. There is nobody I can talk to about serious problems
        2. My mother or father or guardian
        3. My boyfriend or girlfriend
        4. Some other adult
        5. Some other person or persons
        6. Don't know/Refused
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Annual
      Methodology Notes: 

        Adolescents aged 12 to 17 are considered to have an adult in their life with whom they can talk about serious problems if they responded either (2) My mother or father or guardian or (4) Some other adult.

      Trend Issues: 
      Estimates prior to data year 2015 were removed for country of birth and geographic location due to a questionnaire redesign of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) beginning in data year 2015, which resulted in a break in trend. Estimates were removed for both national level, and state-level data including the category ‘all reporting states’.

      About the Data: State

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the state-level data.

      Data Source: 
      National Survey on Drug Use and Health
      Measure: 
      percent
      Numerator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years who have an adult in their lives with whom they can talk about serious problems

      Denominator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years

      Questions Used to Obtain the State Data: 

          From the 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health:

          [NUMERATOR:]

          If you wanted to talk to someone about a serious problem, which of the following people would you turn to?

          1. There is nobody I can talk to about serious problems
          2. My mother or father or guardian
          3. My boyfriend or girlfriend
          4. Some other adult
          5. Some other person or persons
          6. Don't know/Refused
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Annual
      Methodology Notes: 

          Adolescents aged 12 to 17 are considered to have an adult in their life with whom they can talk about serious problems if they responded either (2) My mother or father or guardian or (4) Some other adult.

      Trend Issues: 
      Estimates prior to data year 2015 were removed for country of birth and geographic location due to a questionnaire redesign of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) beginning in data year 2015, which resulted in a break in trend. Estimates were removed for both national level, and state-level data including the category ‘all reporting states’.

      Revision History

      Any change to the objective text, baseline, target, target-setting method or data source since the Healthy People 2020 launch.

      Description of Changes Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      During regular data collection and processing checks, errors were identified in the NSDUH data. These errors affected the data for Pennsylvania (2006-2010) and Maryland (2008-2009). These errors had minimal impact on the national estimates and no effect on direct estimates for the other 48 states and the District of Columbia. Comparing estimates for Pennsylvania, Maryland, the mid-Atlantic division, and the Northeast region were of most concern. As a result, in 2013 the original baseline was revised from 75.7 to 75.6 percent. The target was adjusted from 83.3 to 83.2 percent to reflect the revised baseline using the original target-setting method.
    • AH-3.2 Increase the proportion of parents who attend events and activities in which their adolescents participate

      About the Data: National

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

      Data Source: 
      National Survey of Children's Health
      Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      No
      Measure: 
      percent
      Baseline (Year): 
      82.1 (2007)
      Target: 
      90.3
      Target-Setting Method: 
      10 percent improvement
      Numerator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years whose parents usually or always attend organized extra-curricular and/or out-of-school activities in which they participate

      Denominator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years who participate in one or more organized extra-curricular and/or out-of-school activities

      Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
      Not applicable
      Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

        From the 2007 National Survey of Children's Health:

        [NUMERATOR and DENOMINATOR:]

        During the past 12 months, how often did you attend events or activities that [S.C.] participated in? Would you say never, sometimes, usually or always?:

        1. Never
        2. Sometimes
        3. Usually
        4. Always
        5. Don't know
        6. Refused
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Periodic
      Methodology Notes: 

        The indicator is based on the combined responses of parents who either usually or always attend the events and activities their adolescent participates in.

        Children with special health care needs are identified by parents’ reports that their child has a health problem expected to last at least 12 months and which requires prescription medication, more services than most children, special therapies, or which limits his or her ability to do things most children can do.

      Trend Issues: 
      The 2011/12 survey included the addition of cell phones to the sample. This has implications for the comparability of items between 2007 and 2011/12.

      About the Data: State

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the state-level data.

      Data Source: 
      National Survey of Children's Health
      Measure: 
      percent
      Numerator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years whose parents usually or always attend organized extra-curricular and/or out-of-school activities in which they participate

      Denominator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years who participate in one or more organized extra-curricular and/or out-of-school activities

      Questions Used to Obtain the State Data: 

          From the 2007 National Survey of Children's Health:

          [NUMERATOR and DENOMINATOR:]

          During the past 12 months, how often did you attend events or activities that [S.C.] participated in? Would you say never, sometimes, usually or always?:

          1. Never
          2. Sometimes
          3. Usually
          4. Always
          5. Don't know
          6. Refused
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Periodic
      Methodology Notes: 

          The indicator is based on the combined responses of parents who either usually or always attend the events and activities their adolescent participates in.

          Children with special health care needs are identified by parents’ reports that their child has a health problem expected to last at least 12 months and which requires prescription medication, more services than most children, special therapies, or which limits his or her ability to do things most children can do.

      Trend Issues: 
      The 2011/12 survey included the addition of cell phones to the sample. This has implications for the comparability of items between 2007 and 2011/12.
  • AH-4 Increase the proportion of adolescents who transition to self-sufficiency from foster care

    • AH-4.1 Increase the proportion of adolescents in foster care who exhibit positive early indicators of readiness for transition to adulthood

      About the Data: National

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

      Data Source: 
      National Youth in Transition Database
      Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      Yes
      Measure: 
      percent
      Baseline (Year): 
      42.8 (2010–11)
      Target: 
      47.1
      Target-Setting Method: 
      10 percent improvement
      Numerator: 

      Number of 17 year old youth in foster care indicating readiness

      Denominator: 

      Number of 17 year olds in foster care who completed the NYTD survey

      Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
      Not applicable
      Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

        From the FFY2011 National Youth in Transition Database:

        [NUMERATOR:]

        Are you currently employed full-time?

        1. Yes
        2. No
        3. Declined
        4. Blank

        Are you currently employed part-time

        1. Yes
        2. No
        3. Declined
        4. Blank

        In the past year, did you complete an apprenticeship, internship, or other on-the-job training, either paid or unpaid?

        1. Yes
        2. No
        3. Declined
        4. Blank

        Currently, are you enrolled in and attending high school, GED classes, post-high school vocational training, or college?

        1. Yes
        2. No
        3. Declined
        4. Blank

        Currently is there at least one adult in your life, other than your caseworker, to whom you can go for advice or emotional support?

        1. Yes
        2. No
        3. Declined
        4. Blank

        Have you ever referred yourself or has someone referred you for an alcohol or drug abuse assessment or counseling?

        1. Yes
        2. No
        3. Declined
        4. Blank

        Have you ever been confined in a jail, prison, correctional facility, or juvenile or community detention facility, in connection with allegedly committing a crime?

        1. Yes
        2. No
        3. Declined
        4. Blank

        Have you ever given birth or fathered any children that were born?

        1. Yes
        2. No
        3. Declined
        4. Blank
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Periodic
      Methodology Notes: 

        Positive early indication of readiness for transition to adulthood is defined as a youth who meets all of the following criteria: (1) is either employed part/full-time or had employment skills or was currently enrolled and attending school; (2) reported having a positive connection to an adult; (3) did not report ever having been referred to substance abuse counseling/assessment; (4) did not report a history of incarceration; AND (5) did not report having given birth to or fathering a child.

        The National Youth in Transition Database (NYTD) is a national, mandatory data collection system where reporting areas (states, DC, PR) provide information to the Administration for Children and Families on two populations: (1) youth who receive independent living services paid for or provided by state agencies that administer John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Programs (CFCIPs); and (2) triennial cohorts of youth in foster care at age 17, with follow-up information collected at ages 19 and 21. Data are reported for the Federal Fiscal Year (FFY), which runs from October 1 through September 30 (e.g., FFY 2011 covers the period October 1, 2011—September 30, 2012). Select data elements from surveyed cohorts of 17 year old youth are used to monitor and measure early indicators of readiness for transition to adulthood. The first cohort of 17 year olds was surveyed in FFY 2011, with new cohorts to be surveyed every three years thereafter (FY2014, FY2017, FY2020, etc.).

        National data for this objective are collected from the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

      Caveats and Limitations: 
      In FFY 2011 53% of the eligible 17 year olds in foster care completed the survey. A bias analysis was conducted due to the low response rates. There is no apparent demographic bias (race, ethnicity, or sex) in response/non-response rates. Response rates did, however, vary among reporting areas. With this systematic bias occurring in the first year of data collection, results may not be representative of the national population of 17 year old youth in foster care. It is expected that future data collection efforts will yield comparative, higher response rates across all reporting areas. While response rates ranged from 12% to 100%, almost three-quarters of the reporting areas (71%) had response rates over the national average of 53%. Additionally, many youth (approximately 10% more) were surveyed more than 45 days after turning 17, but for federal requirements and analysis purposes these surveys are not included in the official response rates. NYTD is a multi-modal census survey. The mode of data collected may be different for each state that collects data. This can limit comparability of data between reporting areas.

      About the Data: State

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the state-level data.

      Data Source: 
      National Youth in Transition Database
      Measure: 
      percent
      Numerator: 

      Number of 17 year old youth in foster care indicating readiness

      Denominator: 

      Number of 17 year olds in foster care who completed the NYTD survey

      Questions Used to Obtain the State Data: 

          From the FFY2011 National Youth in Transition Database:

          [NUMERATOR:]

          Are you currently employed full-time?

          1. Yes
          2. No
          3. Declined
          4. Blank

          Are you currently employed part-time

          1. Yes
          2. No
          3. Declined
          4. Blank

          In the past year, did you complete an apprenticeship, internship, or other on-the-job training, either paid or unpaid?

          1. Yes
          2. No
          3. Declined
          4. Blank

          Currently, are you enrolled in and attending high school, GED classes, post-high school vocational training, or college?

          1. Yes
          2. No
          3. Declined
          4. Blank

          Currently is there at least one adult in your life, other than your caseworker, to whom you can go for advice or emotional support?

          1. Yes
          2. No
          3. Declined
          4. Blank

          Have you ever referred yourself or has someone referred you for an alcohol or drug abuse assessment or counseling?

          1. Yes
          2. No
          3. Declined
          4. Blank

          Have you ever been confined in a jail, prison, correctional facility, or juvenile or community detention facility, in connection with allegedly committing a crime?

          1. Yes
          2. No
          3. Declined
          4. Blank

          Have you ever given birth or fathered any children that were born?

          1. Yes
          2. No
          3. Declined
          4. Blank
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Periodic
      Methodology Notes: 

          Positive early indication of readiness for transition to adulthood is defined as a youth who meets all of the following criteria: (1) is either employed part/full-time or had employment skills or was currently enrolled and attending school; (2) reported having a positive connection to an adult; (3) did not report ever having been referred to substance abuse counseling/assessment; (4) did not report a history of incarceration; AND (5) did not report having given birth to or fathering a child.

          The National Youth in Transition Database (NYTD) is a national, mandatory data collection system where reporting areas (states, DC, PR) provide information to the Administration for Children and Families on two populations: (1) youth who receive independent living services paid for or provided by state agencies that administer John H. Chafee Foster Care Independence Programs (CFCIPs); and (2) triennial cohorts of youth in foster care at age 17, with follow-up information collected at ages 19 and 21. Data are reported for the Federal Fiscal Year (FFY), which runs from October 1 through September 30 (e.g., FFY 2011 covers the period October 1, 2011—September 30, 2012). Select data elements from surveyed cohorts of 17 year old youth are used to monitor and measure early indicators of readiness for transition to adulthood. The first cohort of 17 year olds was surveyed in FFY 2011, with new cohorts to be surveyed every three years thereafter (FY2014, FY2017, FY2020, etc.).

          National data for this objective are collected from the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

      Caveats and Limitations: 
      In FFY 2011 53% of the eligible 17 year olds in foster care completed the survey. A bias analysis was conducted due to the low response rates. There is no apparent demographic bias (race, ethnicity, or sex) in response/non-response rates. Response rates did, however, vary among reporting areas. With this systematic bias occurring in the first year of data collection, results may not be representative of the national population of 17 year old youth in foster care. It is expected that future data collection efforts will yield comparative, higher response rates across all reporting areas. While response rates ranged from 12% to 100%, almost three-quarters of the reporting areas (71%) had response rates over the national average of 53%. Additionally, many youth (approximately 10% more) were surveyed more than 45 days after turning 17, but for federal requirements and analysis purposes these surveys are not included in the official response rates. NYTD is a multi-modal census survey. The mode of data collected may be different for each state that collects data. This can limit comparability of data between reporting areas.

      Revision History

      Any change to the objective text, baseline, target, target-setting method or data source since the Healthy People 2020 launch.

      Description of Changes Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      At launch the objective text was "AH-4 (Developmental) Increase the proportion of adolescents and young adults who transition to self-sufficiency from foster care". In 2014 this objective was moved to measurable and the objective number was changed from AH-4 to AH-4.1. The original objective text was retained as a header, and the measured objective text, "Increase the proportion of adolescents in foster care who exhibit positive early indicators of readiness for transition to adulthood," was added.

      References

      Additional resources about the objective

      1. http://www.ndacan.cornell.edu/ (Publicly available NYTD datasets)
  • AH-5 Increase educational achievement of adolescents and young adults

    • AH-5.1 Increase the proportion of students who graduate with a regular diploma 4 years after starting 9th grade
      LHI

      Leading Health Indicators are a subset of Healthy People 2020 objectives selected to communicate high-priority health issues.

      About the Data

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

      Data Source: 
      Common Core of Data
      Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      Yes
      Measure: 
      percent
      Baseline (Year): 
      79 (2010–11)
      Target: 
      87
      Target-Setting Method: 
      10 percent improvement
      Numerator: 

      Number of students who earned a regular high school diploma by the end of the school year within four school years of starting 9th grade for the first time

      Denominator: 

      Number of first-time 9th graders in the fall of that school year (starting cohort) plus students who transferred in, minus students who transferred out, emigrated, or died during that school year and the three subsequent school years

      Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
      Not applicable
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Annual
      Leading Health Indicator:
      Methodology Notes: 

        The on-time high school graduation rate measures the percent of high school students that graduate within 4 years of starting ninth grade.

        The four-year regulatory adjusted cohort graduation rate (ACGR) is used for this measure. The ACGR is defined as the number of students who graduate in four years or less with a regular high school diploma divided by the number of students who form the adjusted cohort for the graduating class. In order to calculate and report the 4-year ACGR, states must follow the progress of each individual 9th-12th grade student over time and maintain documentation of students who enter or leave schools or districts within their state. From the beginning of ninth grade (or the earliest high school grade), students who are entering that grade for the first time form a cohort that is “adjusted” by adding any students who subsequently transfer into the cohort from another state and subtracting any students who subsequently transfer out, emigrate to another country, or die.

      Trend Issues: 
      Estimates include any of the 50 states and the District of Columbia that reported all data elements. Data do not include students served by Bureau of Indian Education and Department of Defense schools.
      Exceptions for the 2010-11 school year were: data were imputed for Idaho, Kentucky, and Oklahoma.
      Exceptions for the 2011-12 school year were: data were imputed for Idaho, Kentucky, and Oklahoma.
      Exceptions for the 2012-13 school year were: data were imputed for Idaho.

      Revision History

      Any change to the objective text, baseline, target, target-setting method or data source since the Healthy People 2020 launch.

      Description of Changes Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      The Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate (AFGR) was previously used to measure this objective. In May 2015, the measure used for this objective was changed to the 4-year adjusted cohort graduation rate (ACGR). As a result the baseline, baseline year, and target were revised. The baseline changed from 74.9% to 79%. The baseline year changed from 2007-08 to 2010-11. The target was adjusted from 82.4% to 87% to reflect the revised baseline using the original target setting method.

      References

      Additional resources about the objective

      1. National Center for Education Statistics Common Core of Data

    • AH-5.2 Increase the proportion of students who are served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act who graduate high school with a diploma

      About the Data

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

      Data Source: 
      Individuals with Disabilities Education Act data
      Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      Yes
      Measure: 
      percent
      Baseline (Year): 
      59.1 (2007–08)
      Target: 
      65.0
      Target-Setting Method: 
      10 percent improvement
      Numerator: 

      Number of students, aged 14 to 21years, served under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Part B, who graduated with a diploma

      Denominator: 

      Number of students, aged 14 to 21 years, served under IDEA, Part B, who exited school because they graduated with a regular high school diploma, received a certificate,  reached maximum age, or dropped out

      Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
      Not applicable
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Annual
      Methodology Notes: 

        To determine the denominator, the following categories of students were not counted in the total: students who transferred to regular education and students who moved and were known to be continuing. The following categories were included in the denominator: students who graduated with a diploma, students who received a certificate, students who reached maximum age, students who dropped out, and students who died.

        A certificate is a document that students who leave school can be issued if they did not meet the same standards for graduation as students without disabilities. Examples of certificates include a modified diploma, a certificate of completion, and an alternate degree that is not fully aligned with the State’s educational standards.

      Caveats and Limitations: 
      Data are reported by state and subject to differences in reporting and educational policies across states. For race and ethnicity data from 2007-2008, children can only be reported in one race/ethnicity category. Race/ethnicity data reported for 2011-2012 onward children can be reported in one or more race categories or as Hispanic, all race categories shown exclude Hispanic or Latino. For data on limited English proficiency, children are reported based on the definition of limited English proficiency under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 20 U.S.C. Section 7801(A)(25). See Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Data site for information on the data, including definitions of race/ethnicity categories, limited English proficiency, and people with disabilities.

      Revision History

      Any change to the objective text, baseline, target, target-setting method or data source since the Healthy People 2020 launch.

      Description of Changes Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      This objective was revised in 2013 due to a change in programming. Students who died were added to the denominator to better align with how the Department of Education reports the measure. Also, the original baseline included data for 50 states, DC, Puerto Rico and outlying territories, while the revised baseline includes data for 50 states, DC and Puerto Rico. The original baseline was revised from 59.3 to 59.1 percent as a result of these changes. The target was adjusted from 65.2 to 65.0 percent to reflect the revised baseline using the original target-setting method.

      References

      Additional resources about the objective

      1. Data Accountability Center (DAC): Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Data

    • AH-5.3 Increase the proportion of students whose reading skills are at or above the proficient achievement level for their grade

      • AH-5.3.1 Increase the proportion of 4th grade students whose reading skills are at or above the proficient achievement level for their grade

        About the Data

        Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

        Data Source: 
        National Assessment of Educational Progress
        Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
        No
        Measure: 
        percent
        Baseline (Year): 
        33.0 (2009)
        Target: 
        36.3
        Target-Setting Method: 
        10 percent improvement
        Numerator: 

        Number of fourth graders scoring at the proficiency level or higher for grade level in the reading skills test administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress

        Denominator: 

        Number of fourth graders attending public or private schools

        Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
        Not applicable
        Data Collection Frequency: 
        Biennial
        Methodology Notes: 

          The proficient achievement level is one of three National Assessment of Educational Progress (NEAP) achievement levels: basic, proficient, and advanced. Minimum cut-off scores are established for each achievement level by a standard setting process. The proficient achievement level represents solid academic performance for the grade level assessed.

          The NAEP reading assessment measures the reading and comprehension skills of students in grades 4, 8, and 12 by asking them to read selected grade-appropriate passages and answer questions based on what they have read. The 2009 NAEP Reading Framework is based on the following definition of reading: Reading is an active and complex process that involves: understanding written text, developing and interpreting meaning, using meaning as appropriate to type of text, purpose, and situation.

        Caveats and Limitations: 
        Students are eligible for the National School Lunch Program (either free or reduced priced lunch) if their family income is at or below 185% if the poverty level. Data for English Language Learner cannot be generalized to the total population of English language learners--some students are unable to take the test. Students are classified by the school as having a disability. Students may have an individualized education plan (IEP) or a 504 plan. Data for students with disabilities cannot be generalized to the total population of disabled students--some students are unable to take the test.

        References

        Additional resources about the objective

        1. The Nations Report Card…the official site for results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress

      • AH-5.3.2 Increase the proportion of 8th grade students whose reading skills are at or above the proficient achievement level for their grade

        About the Data

        Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

        Data Source: 
        National Assessment of Educational Progress
        Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
        No
        Measure: 
        percent
        Baseline (Year): 
        32.4 (2009)
        Target: 
        35.6
        Target-Setting Method: 
        10 percent improvement
        Numerator: 

        Number of eighth graders scoring at the proficiency level or higher for grade level in the reading skills test administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress

        Denominator: 

        Number of eighth graders attending public or private schools

        Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
        Not applicable
        Data Collection Frequency: 
        Biennial
        Methodology Notes: 

          The proficient achievement level is one of three National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) achievement levels: basic, proficient, and advanced. Minimum cut-off scores are established for each achievement level by a standard setting process. The proficient achievement level represents solid academic performance for the grade level assessed.

          The NAEP reading assessment measures the reading and comprehension skills of students in grades 4, 8, and 12 by asking them to read selected grade-appropriate passages and answer questions based on what they have read. The 2009 NAEP Reading Framework is based on the following definition of reading: Reading is an active and complex process that involves: understanding written text, developing and interpreting meaning, using meaning as appropriate to type of text, purpose, and situation.

        Caveats and Limitations: 
        Students are eligible for the National School Lunch Program (either free or reduced priced lunch) if their family income is at or below 185% if the poverty level. Data for English Language Learner cannot be generalized to the total population of English language learners--some students are unable to take the test. Students are classified by the school as having a disability. Students may have an individualized education plan (IEP) or a 504 plan. Data for students with disabilities cannot be generalized to the total population of disabled students--some students are unable to take the test.

        References

        Additional resources about the objective

        1. The Nations Report Card…the official site for results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress

      • AH-5.3.3 Increase the proportion of 12th grade students whose reading skills are at or above the proficient achievement level for their grade

        About the Data

        Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

        Data Source: 
        National Assessment of Educational Progress
        Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
        No
        Measure: 
        percent
        Baseline (Year): 
        35.4 (2005)
        Target: 
        38.9
        Target-Setting Method: 
        10 percent improvement
        Numerator: 

        Number of twelfth graders scoring at the proficiency level or higher for grade level in the reading skills test administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress

        Denominator: 

        Number of twelfth graders attending public or private schools

        Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
        Not applicable
        Data Collection Frequency: 
        Periodic
        Methodology Notes: 

          The proficient achievement level is one of three National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) achievement levels: basic, proficient, and advanced. Minimum cut-off scores are established for each achievement level by a standard setting process. The proficient achievement level represents solid academic performance for the grade level assessed.

          The NAEP reading assessment measures the reading and comprehension skills of students in grades 4, 8, and 12 by asking them to read selected grade-appropriate passages and answer questions based on what they have read.
          The 2005 NAEP reading framework specifies that 35 percent of the assessment be devoted to reading for literary experience, 45 percent to reading for information, and 20 percent to reading to perform a task. The 2009 NAEP Reading Framework is based on the following definition of reading: Reading is an active and complex process that involves: understanding written text, developing and interpreting meaning, using meaning as appropriate to type of text, purpose, and situation. In addition, for grade 12, the NAEP reading assessment measures preparedness for postsecondary endeavors.

          The 2009 NAEP reading framework replaces the framework used for the 1992-2005 twelfth-grade reading assessments. Compared to the previous framework, the 2009 reading framework for grade 12 includes more emphasis on cognitive processes, a wider variety of literary and informational texts, and a new systematic assessment of vocabulary knowledge. The 2009 reading framework for grade 12 specified that a higher proportion of the text types should be informational (70 percent). This change from the earlier framework was made to enable NAEP to better assess the preparedness of twelfth-graders for postsecondary education and training. Results from the 2009 reading trend study determined that the 2009 reading assessment results could be compared to results from earlier assessment years.

        Caveats and Limitations: 
        Students are eligible for the National School Lunch Program (either free or reduced priced lunch) if their family income is at or below 185% if the poverty level. Data for English Language Learner cannot be generalized to the total population of English language learners--some students are unable to take the test. Students are classified by the school as having a disability. Students may have an individualized education plan (IEP) or a 504 plan. Data for students with disabilities cannot be generalized to the total population of disabled students--some students are unable to take the test.

        References

        Additional resources about the objective

        1. The Nations Report Card…the official site for results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress

    • AH-5.4 Increase the proportion of students whose mathematics skills are at or above the proficient achievement level for their grade

      • AH-5.4.1 Increase the proportion of 4th grade students whose mathematics skills are at or above the proficient achievement level for their grade

        About the Data

        Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

        Data Source: 
        National Assessment of Educational Progress
        Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
        No
        Measure: 
        percent
        Baseline (Year): 
        39.1 (2009)
        Target: 
        43.0
        Target-Setting Method: 
        10 percent improvement
        Numerator: 

        Number of fourth graders scoring at the proficiency level or higher for grade level in the mathematics skills test administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress

        Denominator: 

        Number of fourth graders attending public or private schools

        Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
        Not applicable
        Data Collection Frequency: 
        Biennial
        Methodology Notes: 

          The proficient achievement level is one of three National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) achievement levels: basic, proficient, and advanced. Minimum cut-off scores are established for each achievement level by a standard setting process. The proficient achievement level represents solid academic performance for the grade level assessed.

          The mathematics assessment was designed to measure students' knowledge of mathematics and their ability to apply that knowledge in problem-solving situations. The mathematics framework classifies assessment questions in two dimensions, content area and mathematical complexity, that are used to guide the assessment. Each question is designed to measure one of the five mathematics content areas: number properties and operations, measurement, geometry, data analysis, statistics, probability, and algebra.

        Caveats and Limitations: 
        Students are eligible for the National School Lunch Program (either free or reduced priced lunch) if their family income is at or below 185% if the poverty level. Data for English Language Learner cannot be generalized to the total population of English language learners--some students are unable to take the test. Students are classified by the school as having a disability. Students may have an individualized education plan (IEP) or a 504 plan. Data for students with disabilities cannot be generalized to the total population of disabled students--some students are unable to take the test.

        References

        Additional resources about the objective

        1. The Nations Report Card…the official site for results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress

      • AH-5.4.2 Increase the proportion of 8th grade students whose mathematics skills are at or above the proficient achievement level for their grade

        About the Data

        Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

        Data Source: 
        National Assessment of Educational Progress
        Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
        No
        Measure: 
        percent
        Baseline (Year): 
        33.9 (2009)
        Target: 
        37.3
        Target-Setting Method: 
        10 percent improvement
        Numerator: 

        Number of eighth graders scoring at the proficiency level or higher for grade level in the mathematics skills test administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress

        Denominator: 

        Number of eighth graders attending public or private schools

        Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
        Not applicable
        Data Collection Frequency: 
        Biennial
        Methodology Notes: 

          The proficient achievement level is one of three National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) achievement levels: basic, proficient, and advanced. Minimum cut-off scores are established for each achievement level by a standard setting process. The proficient achievement level represents solid academic performance for the grade level assessed.

          The mathematics assessment was designed to measure students' knowledge of mathematics and their ability to apply that knowledge in problem-solving situations. The mathematics framework classifies assessment questions in two dimensions, content area and mathematical complexity, that are used to guide the assessment. Each question is designed to measure one of the five mathematics content areas: number properties and operations, measurement, geometry, data analysis, statistics, probability, and algebra.

        Caveats and Limitations: 
        Students are eligible for the National School Lunch Program (either free or reduced priced lunch) if their family income is at or below 185% if the poverty level. Data for English Language Learner cannot be generalized to the total population of English language learners--some students are unable to take the test. Students are classified by the school as having a disability. Students may have an individualized education plan (IEP) or a 504 plan. Data for students with disabilities cannot be generalized to the total population of disabled students--some students are unable to take the test.

        References

        Additional resources about the objective

        1. The Nations Report Card…the official site for results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress

      • AH-5.4.3 Increase the proportion of 12th grade students whose mathematics skills are at or above the proficient achievement level for their grade

        About the Data

        Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

        Data Source: 
        National Assessment of Educational Progress
        Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
        No
        Measure: 
        percent
        Baseline (Year): 
        23.0 (2005)
        Target: 
        25.3
        Target-Setting Method: 
        10 percent improvement
        Numerator: 

        Number of twelfth graders scoring at the proficiency level or higher for grade level in the mathematics skills test administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress

        Denominator: 

        Number of twelfth graders attending public or private schools

        Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
        Not applicable
        Data Collection Frequency: 
        Periodic
        Methodology Notes: 

          The proficient achievement level is one of three National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) achievement levels: basic, proficient, and advanced. Minimum cut-off scores are established for each achievement level by a standard setting process. The proficient achievement level represents solid academic performance for the grade level assessed.

          The mathematics assessment was designed to measure students' knowledge of mathematics and their ability to apply that knowledge in problem-solving situations. The mathematics framework classifies assessment questions in two dimensions, content area and mathematical complexity, that are used to guide the assessment. Each question is designed to measure one of the five mathematics content areas: number properties and operations, measurement, geometry, data analysis, statistics, probability, and algebra. At grade 12, the measurement and geometry content areas are combined into one for reporting purposes to reflect the fact that the majority of measurement topics suitable for grade 12 students are geometric in nature. Items are also classified by mathematical complexity: low, moderate and high complexity.

        Caveats and Limitations: 
        Students are eligible for the National School Lunch Program (either free or reduced priced lunch) if their family income is at or below 185% if the poverty level. Data for English Language Learner cannot be generalized to the total population of English language learners--some students are unable to take the test. Students are classified by the school as having a disability. Students may have an individualized education plan (IEP) or a 504 plan. Data for students with disabilities cannot be generalized to the total population of disabled students--some students are unable to take the test.

        References

        Additional resources about the objective

        1. The Nations Report Card…the official site for results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress

    • AH-5.5 Increase the proportion of adolescents who consider their school work to be meaningful and important

      About the Data: National

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

      Data Source: 
      National Survey on Drug Use and Health
      Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      Yes
      Measure: 
      percent
      Baseline (Year): 
      26.4 (2008)
      Target: 
      29.0
      Target-Setting Method: 
      10 percent improvement
      Numerator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to17 years who always felt that their assigned school work was meaningful and important during the past 12 months

      Denominator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years who attended any type of school or were home-schooled during the past 12 months

      Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
      Not applicable
      Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

        From the 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health:

        [NUMERATOR:]

        During the past 12 months, how often did you feel that the school work you were assigned to do was meaningful and important?

        1. Always
        2. Sometimes
        3. Seldom
        4. Never
        5. Don't know/Refused
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Annual
      Methodology Notes: 

        Students are considered to feel that their assigned school work was meaningful and important during the past 12 months if they answered 'always' to the numerator question listed.

      Trend Issues: 
      Estimates prior to data year 2015 were removed for country of birth and geographic location due to a questionnaire redesign of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) beginning in data year 2015, which resulted in a break in trend. Estimates were removed for both national level, and state-level data including the category ‘all reporting states’.

      About the Data: State

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the state-level data.

      Data Source: 
      National Survey on Drug Use and Health
      Measure: 
      percent
      Numerator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to17 years who always felt that their assigned school work was meaningful and important during the past 12 months

      Denominator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years who attended any type of school or were home-schooled during the past 12 months

      Questions Used to Obtain the State Data: 

          From the 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health:

          [NUMERATOR:]

          During the past 12 months, how often did you feel that the school work you were assigned to do was meaningful and important?

          1. Always
          2. Sometimes
          3. Seldom
          4. Never
          5. Don't know/Refused
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Annual
      Methodology Notes: 

          Students are considered to feel that their assigned school work was meaningful and important during the past 12 months if they answered 'always' to the numerator question listed.

      Trend Issues: 
      Estimates prior to data year 2015 were removed for country of birth and geographic location due to a questionnaire redesign of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) beginning in data year 2015, which resulted in a break in trend. Estimates were removed for both national level, and state-level data including the category ‘all reporting states’.

      Revision History

      Any change to the objective text, baseline, target, target-setting method or data source since the Healthy People 2020 launch.

      Description of Changes Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      During regular data collection and processing checks, errors were identified in the NSDUH data. These errors affected the data for Pennsylvania (2006-2010) and Maryland (2008-2009). These errors had minimal impact on the national estimates and no effect on direct estimates for the other 48 states and the District of Columbia. Comparing estimates for Pennsylvania, Maryland, the mid-Atlantic division, and the Northeast region were of most concern. As a result in 2013, the baseline value was revised from 26.6% to 26.4%. The target was adjusted from 29.3% to 29.0% to reflect the revised baseline using the original target-setting method.
    • AH-5.6 Decrease school absenteeism among adolescents due to illness or injury

      About the Data

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

      Data Source: 
      National Health Interview Survey
      Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      Yes
      Measure: 
      percent
      Baseline (Year): 
      5.0 (2008)
      Target: 
      3.6
      Target-Setting Method: 
      Minimal statistical significance
      Target-Setting Method Justification: 
      The target is the smallest improvement that results in a statistically significant difference when tested against the baseline value, assuming the same standard error for the target as the baseline.
      Numerator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years who missed 11 or more whole school days during the preceding 12 months because of illness or injury

      Denominator: 

      Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years who attended school during the preceding 12 months

      Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
      Not applicable
      Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

        From the 2008 National Health Interview Survey:

        [NUMERATOR:]

        DURING THE PAST 12 MONTHS, that is, since {fill1:12-month ref. date}, about how many days did {fill2: S.C. name} miss school because of illness or injury?

        1. None
        2. 1 - 240 days
        3. Did not go to school
        4. Refused
        5. Not ascertained
        6. Don't know
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Annual
      Methodology Notes: 

        Children who did not go to school in the past 12 months are excluded from the measure.

      Trend Issues: 
      Beginning with 2018, the American Community Survey questions are no longer available in the NHIS. As a result, tabulated data by disability are discontinued after 2017.

      Revision History

      Any change to the objective text, baseline, target, target-setting method or data source since the Healthy People 2020 launch.

      Description of Changes Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      In 2012, the baseline for this measure was revised from 14.6% to 5.0% due to a programming error that excluded students who missed 1 to 10 days of school from the denominator. The original target was changed from 13.1% to TBD until a new target can be set based on the target setting guidance for Healthy People 2020. In 2015 the target was revised to 3.6% using the minimal statistical significance target setting method.
  • AH-6 Increase the proportion of schools with a school breakfast program

    About the Data

    Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

    Data Source: 
    School Health Policies and Practices Study
    Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
    No
    Measure: 
    percent
    Baseline (Year): 
    68.6 (2006)
    Target: 
    75.5
    Target-Setting Method: 
    10 percent improvement
    Numerator: 

    Number of public and private, elementary, middle and high schools that offer breakfast to students

    Denominator: 

    Number of public and private elementary, middle and high schools in the U.S.

    Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
    Not applicable
    Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

      From the 2006 School Health Policies and Programs Study:

      [NUMERATOR:]

      Does this school offer breakfast to students?

      1. Yes
      2. No
    Data Collection Frequency: 
    Periodic
    Methodology Notes: 

      Starting with the 2012 survey, the name of the SHPPS survey was changed from the School Health Policies and Programs Study to the School Health Policies and Practices Study.

      This questionnaire was administered using computer assisted personal interview technology.

  • AH-7 Reduce the proportion of adolescents who have been offered, sold, or given an illegal drug on school property

    About the Data: National

    Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

    Data Source: 
    Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System
    Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
    No
    Measure: 
    percent
    Baseline (Year): 
    22.7 (2009)
    Target: 
    20.4
    Target-Setting Method: 
    10 percent improvement
    Numerator: 

    Number of students in grades 9 through 12 who report being offered, sold, or given an illegal drug on school property

    Denominator: 

    Number of students in grades 9 through 12 attending public or private schools

    Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
    Not applicable
    Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

      From the 2009 Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System:

      [NUMERATOR:]

      During the past 12 months, has anyone offered, sold, or given you an illegal drug on school property?

      1. Yes
      2. No
    Data Collection Frequency: 
    Biennial

    About the Data: State

    Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the state-level data.

    Data Source: 
    Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System
    Measure: 
    percent
    Numerator: 

    Number of students in grades 9 through 12 who report being offered, sold, or given an illegal drug on school property

    Denominator: 

    Number of students in grades 9 through 12 attending public or private schools

    Questions Used to Obtain the State Data: 

        From the 2009 Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System:

        [NUMERATOR:]

        During the past 12 months, has anyone offered, sold, or given you an illegal drug on school property?

        1. Yes
        2. No
    Data Collection Frequency: 
    Biennial
  • AH-8 Increase the proportion of adolescents whose parents consider them to be safe at school

    About the Data: National

    Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

    Data Source: 
    National Survey of Children's Health
    Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
    No
    Measure: 
    percent
    Baseline (Year): 
    86.4 (2007)
    Target: 
    95.0
    Target-Setting Method: 
    10 percent improvement
    Numerator: 

    Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years whose parents report that they feel their child is usually or always safe at school

    Denominator: 

    Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years who live in households, attend school, and are not home-schooled

    Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
    Not applicable
    Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

      From the 2007 National Survey on Children's Health:

      [NUMERATOR and DENOMINATOR:]

      How often do you feel [he/she] is safe at school? Would you say never, sometimes, usually, or always?

      1. Never
      2. Sometimes
      3. Usually
      4. Always
      5. Don't Know
      6. Refused
    Data Collection Frequency: 
    Periodic
    Methodology Notes: 

      Adolescents whose parents answer usually or always are included in this measure. The measure does not include children who are either home-schooled or were not enrolled in school during the previous 12 months.

      Data for children with special health care needs includes children and youth identified by parents’ reports that their child has a health problem expected to last at least 12 months and which requires prescription medication, more services than most children, special therapies, or which limits his or her ability to do things most children can do.

    Trend Issues: 
    The samples in 2003 and 2007 were drawn by random digit dial telephone sampling. The 2011/12 survey included the addition of cell phones to the sample. This has implications for the comparability of items between 2007 and 2011/12.

    About the Data: State

    Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the state-level data.

    Data Source: 
    National Survey of Children's Health
    Measure: 
    percent
    Numerator: 

    Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years whose parents report that they feel their child is usually or always safe at school

    Denominator: 

    Number of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years who live in households, attend school, and are not home-schooled

    Questions Used to Obtain the State Data: 

        From the 2007 National Survey on Children's Health:

        [NUMERATOR and DENOMINATOR:]

        How often do you feel [he/she] is safe at school? Would you say never, sometimes, usually, or always?

        1. Never
        2. Sometimes
        3. Usually
        4. Always
        5. Don't Know
        6. Refused
    Data Collection Frequency: 
    Periodic
    Methodology Notes: 

        Adolescents whose parents answer usually or always are included in this measure. The measure does not include children who are either home-schooled or were not enrolled in school during the previous 12 months.

        Data for children with special health care needs includes children and youth identified by parents’ reports that their child has a health problem expected to last at least 12 months and which requires prescription medication, more services than most children, special therapies, or which limits his or her ability to do things most children can do.

    Trend Issues: 
    The samples in 2003 and 2007 were drawn by random digit dial telephone sampling. The 2011/12 survey included the addition of cell phones to the sample. This has implications for the comparability of items between 2007 and 2011/12.
  • AH-9 Increase the proportion of middle and high schools that prohibit harassment based on a student’s sexual orientation or gender identity

    About the Data: National

    Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

    Data Source: 
    School Health Profiles
    Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
    Yes
    Measure: 
    percent
    Baseline (Year): 
    88.2 (2010)
    Target: 
    92.2
    Target-Setting Method: 
    4 percentage point improvement
    Target-Setting Method Justification: 
    The applicable target setting method for this measure is a 4 percentage point improvement over baseline. The data are presented as a median percent across states, not a mean percent. The median percent represents the middle value of an entire array of numeric values, so in the case of this measure, half of states report a higher percent of schools with a policy in place prohibiting harassment based on a student’s sexual orientation or gender identity, and half of states report a lower percent of schools with such a policy in place. As a result of this calculation method, the amount of change expected to be seen in the data is smaller compared to using a mean percent. The baseline data indicate that in 2010, 88.2% of secondary schools (range across states 71.9% - 98.9%) prohibited harassment based on a student’s sexual orientation or gender identity. As this baseline percent is already high, a 4 percentage point improvement is reasonable. While other target setting methods were considered, none were identified as appropriate for this objective. It was not possible to use statistical significance due to a lack of standard errors for computing MSS. The default method of 10% improvement would have resulted in a target of 97%, which is too high, given that these data look at the median percent of state rates and not the mean. Given the high baseline and the other circumstances noted for this objective, a 4 percentage point improvement was identified for target setting.
    Numerator: 

    Number of public and private middle and junior high schools that prohibit harassment based on a student’s perceived or actual sexual orientation or gender identity

    Denominator: 

    Number of public and private middle and junior high schools

    Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
    Not applicable
    Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

      From the 2010 School Health Profiles Study:

      [NUMERATOR:]

      Does your school engage in each of the following practices related to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or questioning (LGBTQ) youth? [Mark yes or no for each practice.]

      • Prohibit harassment based on a student's perceived or actual sexual orientation or gender identity.
      1. Yes
      2. No
    Data Collection Frequency: 
    Biennial
    Methodology Notes: 

      Schools that respond 'yes' are counted as schools that prohibit harassment based on a student's perceived or actual sexual orientation or gender identity. The national measure is the median of all reporting states.

    Trend Issues: 
    The 2010 median estimate includes all states and D.C. except for Illinois. The 2012 median estimate includes all states and D.C. except for: CT, IL, LA, NY, and TX.

    About the Data: State

    Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the state-level data.

    Data Source: 
    School Health Profiles
    Measure: 
    percent
    Numerator: 

    Number of public and private middle and junior high schools that prohibit harassment based on a student’s perceived or actual sexual orientation or gender identity

    Denominator: 

    Number of public and private middle and junior high schools

    Questions Used to Obtain the State Data: 

        From the 2010 School Health Profiles Study:

        [NUMERATOR:]

        Does your school engage in each of the following practices related to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or questioning (LGBTQ) youth? [Mark yes or no for each practice.]

        • Prohibit harassment based on a student's perceived or actual sexual orientation or gender identity.
        1. Yes
        2. No
    Data Collection Frequency: 
    Biennial
    Methodology Notes: 

        Schools that respond 'yes' are counted as schools that prohibit harassment based on a student's perceived or actual sexual orientation or gender identity. The national measure is the median of all reporting states.

    Trend Issues: 
    The 2010 median estimate includes all states and D.C. except for Illinois. The 2012 median estimate includes all states and D.C. except for: CT, IL, LA, NY, and TX.

    Revision History

    Any change to the objective text, baseline, target, target-setting method or data source since the Healthy People 2020 launch.

    Description of Changes Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
    This objective moved from developmental to measurable in 2014.
  • AH-10 Reduce the proportion of public schools with a serious violent incident

    About the Data

    Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

    Data Source: 
    School Survey on Crime and Safety
    Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
    No
    Measure: 
    percent
    Baseline (Year): 
    17.2 (2007–08)
    Target: 
    15.5
    Target-Setting Method: 
    10 percent improvement
    Numerator: 

    Number of public schools in the United States that record a serious violent incident during a school year

    Denominator: 

    Number of public schools in the United States

    Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
    Not applicable
    Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

      From the 2007-08 School Survey on Crime and Safety:

      [NUMERATOR:]

      Please record the number of incidents that occurred at school during the 2007-08 school year for the offenses listed below:

      Total number of recorded incidents

      1. Rape or attempted rape
      2. Sexual battery other than rape (include threatened rape)
      3. Robbery (taking things by force): i. With a weapon
      4. Robbery (taking things by force): ii. Without a weapon
      5. Physical attack or fight: i. With a weapon
      6. Threats of physical attack: i. With a weapon
    Data Collection Frequency: 
    Biennial
    Methodology Notes: 

      A serious violent incident is defined as a report of any of the following offenses: Rape or attempted rape; sexual battery other than rape (including threatened rape); robbery either with or without a weapon; physical attack or fight with a weapon; threat of a physical attack with a weapon.

      Data for primary schools include schools in which the lowest grade is not higher than grade 3 and the highest grade is not higher than grade 8. Data for middle schools include schools in which the lowest grade is not lower than grade 4 and the highest grade is not higher than grade 9. Data for high schools include schools in which the lowest grade is not lower than grade 9 and the highest grade is not higher than grade 12. Data for combined schools include all combinations of grades, including K–12 schools other than primary, middle, and high schools.

      Data for "city" include territories inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city and include large cities (populations of 250,000 or more), midsize cities (population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000) and small cities (population less than 100,000). Data for "suburb" include territories outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area and include large suburbs (populations of 250,000 or more), midsize suburbs (population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000) and small suburbs (population less than 100,000). Data for "town" include fringe towns (territories inside an urban cluster that are less than or equal to 10 miles from an urbanized area), distant towns (territories inside an urban cluster that are more than 10 miles and less than or equal to 35 miles from an urbanized area), and remote towns (territories inside an urban cluster that are more than 35 miles from an urbanized area). Data for "rural" include fringe rural areas (Census-defined rural territory that is less than or equal to 5 miles from an urbanized area, as well as rural territory that is less than or equal to 2.5 miles from an urban cluster), distant rural areas (Census-defined rural territory that is more than 5 miles but less than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, as well as rural territory that is more than 2.5 miles but less than 10 miles from an urban cluster), and remote rural areas (Census-defined rural territory that are more than 25 miles from an urbanized 10 miles from an urban cluster).

      Percent minority enrollment is the percent combined enrollment of Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, and American Indian/Alaska Native students.

    References

    Additional resources about the objective

    1. Dinkes, R., Kemp, J., and Baum, K. (2009). Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2009 (NCES 2010–012/
      NCJ 228478). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, and Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Washington, DC.

    2. National Center for Education Statistics: School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS)

    3. Robers, S., Kemp, J., and Truman, J. (2013). Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2012 (NCES 2013-036/NCJ 241446). National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, and Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Washington, DC

    4. SCHOOL SURVEY ON CRIME AND SAFEY: 2007–08 SCHOOL YEAR PRINCIPAL QUESTIONNAIRE

  • AH-11 Reduce adolescent and young adult perpetration of, and victimization by, crimes

    • AH-11.1 Reduce the rate of minor and young adult perpetration of violent crimes

      About the Data

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

      Data Source: 
      Uniform Crime Reporting Program
      Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      No
      Measure: 
      per 100,000
      Baseline (Year): 
      444.0 (2008)
      Target: 
      399.6
      Target-Setting Method: 
      10 percent improvement
      Numerator: 

      Number of arrests of juveniles aged 10 to 17 years and young adults aged 18 to 24 years for crimes included in the Violent Crime Index (murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault)

      Denominator: 

      Number of juveniles aged 10 to 17 years and young adults aged 18 to 24 years in the residential population

      Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
      Not applicable
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Annual
      Methodology Notes: 

        The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (UCR) is a nationwide, cooperative statistical effort of more than 17,000 city, university and college, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies voluntarily reporting data on crimes brought to their attention. The Violent Crime Index includes the following offenses: Murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. These are Part I offenses and are serious crimes by nature and/or volume.

        The UCR Program uses the following method to estimate crime in the case of missing reports at the Metropolitan Statistical Area, state, and national levels. For agencies that did not report data, the UCR Program staff assign the same percental crime volumes based on the crime statistics of similar areas within a state. The UCR Program staff consider the size of an agency, type of jurisdiction, and geographic location in the estimation process. The UCR Program staff use a similar procedure for estimating the number of arrests for the Nation.

      Caveats and Limitations: 
      Arrest statistics are a measure of flow into the justice system. They report the number of arrests that law enforcement agencies make in a given year but do not represent the number of individuals arrested or the number of crimes committed. In addition, arrests are classified by the most serious offense charged in that arrest using a defined hierarchical system.
      Trend Issues: 
      In 2008, law enforcement agencies active in the UCR Program represented 94.9 percent of the total population. The coverage amounted to 96.0 percent of the population in Metropolitan Statistical Areas, 87.6 percent of the population in cities outside metropolitan areas, and 90.0 percent of the population in nonmetropolitan counties. However, when the number of months for which reports were submitted is taken into consideration, the coverage indicator for 2008 was 76%. When the coverage indicator equals 100%, all law enforcement agencies report for all 12 months.
    • AH-11.2 Reduce the rate of minor and young adult perpetration of serious property crimes

      About the Data

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

      Data Source: 
      Uniform Crime Reporting Program
      Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      No
      Measure: 
      per 100,000
      Baseline (Year): 
      1,526.7 (2008)
      Target: 
      1,374.0
      Target-Setting Method: 
      10 percent improvement
      Numerator: 

      Number of arrests of juveniles aged 10 to 17 years and young adults aged 18 to 24 years for crimes included in the Property Crime Index (burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson)

      Denominator: 

      Number of juveniles aged 10 to 17 years and young adults aged 18 to 24 years in the residential population

      Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
      Not applicable
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Annual
      Methodology Notes: 

        The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (UCR) is a nationwide, cooperative statistical effort of more than 17,000 city, university and college, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies voluntarily reporting data on crimes brought to their attention. The Property Crime Index includes the following offenses: burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. These are Part I offenses and are serious crimes by nature and/or volume.

        The UCR Program uses the following method to estimate crime in the case of missing reports at the Metropolitan Statistical Area, state, and national levels. For agencies that did not report data, the UCR Program staff assign the same percental crime volumes based on the crime statistics of similar areas within a state. The UCR Program staff consider the size of an agency, type of jurisdiction, and geographic location in the estimation process. The UCR Program staff use a similar procedure for estimating the number of arrests for the Nation.

      Caveats and Limitations: 
      Arrest statistics are a measure of flow into the justice system. They report the number of arrests that law enforcement agencies make in a given year but do not represent the number of individuals arrested or the number of crimes committed. In addition, arrests are classified by the most serious offense charged in that arrest using a defined hierarchical system.
      Trend Issues: 
      In 2008, law enforcement agencies active in the UCR Program represented 94.9 percent of the total population. The coverage amounted to 96.0 percent of the population in Metropolitan Statistical Areas, 87.6 percent of the population in cities outside metropolitan areas, and 90.0 percent of the population in nonmetropolitan counties. However, when the number of months for which reports were submitted is taken into consideration, the coverage indicator for 2008 was 76%. When the coverage indicator equals 100%, all law enforcement agencies report for all 12 months.
    • AH-11.3 Decrease the proportion of secondary school students who report the presence of youth gangs at school during the school year

      About the Data

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

      Data Source: 
      National Crime Victimization Survey-School Crime Supplement
      Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      Yes
      Measure: 
      percent
      Baseline (Year): 
      12.4 (2013)
      Target: 
      10.4
      Target-Setting Method: 
      Minimal statistical significance
      Target-Setting Method Justification: 
      The target is the smallest improvement that results in a statistically significant difference when tested against the baseline value, assuming the same standard error for the target as the baseline.
      Numerator: 

      Number of students aged 12 to 18 years in grades 6 through 12 who report that gangs are present at school

      Denominator: 

      Number of students aged 12 to 18 years in grades 6 through 12

      Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
      Not applicable
      Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

        From the 2013 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey:

        Are there any gangs at your school?

          Yes;

        1. No;
        2. Don’t know
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Biennial
      Methodology Notes: 

        Students who answer 'yes' are included in the numerator. All gangs, whether or not they are involved in violent or illegal activity, are included. "At school" includes the school building, on school property, on a school bus, and going to and from school.

      Revision History

      Any change to the objective text, baseline, target, target-setting method or data source since the Healthy People 2020 launch.

      Description of Changes Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      In 2015 the objective was moved to measurable and the objective text was revised. The objective statement was revised from "Reduce the proportion of counties and cities reporting youth gang activity" to "AH-11.3 Decrease the proportion of secondary school students who report the presence of youth gangs at school during the school year." because data were not available for the original objective. The baseline was set at 12.4% and the target was set at 10.4% using the minimal statistical significance target setting method.

      References

      Additional resources about the objective

      1. Highlights of the
        2008 National Youth Gang Survey

      2. National Youth Gang Survey Analysis

    • AH-11.4 Reduce the rate of adolescent and young adult victimization from crimes of violence

      About the Data

      Description of the data source, numerator, denominator, survey questions, and other relevant details about the national estimate.

      Data Source: 
      National Crime Victimization Survey
      Changed Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      Yes
      Measure: 
      per 1,000
      Baseline (Year): 
      42.0 (2013)
      Target: 
      37.8
      Target-Setting Method: 
      10 percent improvement
      Numerator: 

      Number of rapes/sexual assaults, robberies, aggravated assaults, and simple assaults experienced by persons aged 12 to 24 years living in households

      Denominator: 

      Number of persons aged 12 to 24 years living in households

      Comparable Healthy People 2010 Objective: 
      Not applicable
      Questions Used to Obtain the National Baseline Data: 

        From the 2013 National Crime Victimization Survey:

        Public use variable v4529 (Type of Crime Code, New)

        Violent crimes

        • 01 Completed rape
        • 02 Attempted rape
        • 03 Sexual attack with serious assault
        • 04 Sexual attack with minor assault
        • 05 Completed robbery with injury from serious assault
        • 06 Completed robbery with injury from minor assault
        • 07 Completed robbery without injury from minor assault
        • 08 Attempted robbery with injury from serious assault
        • 09 Attempted robbery with injury from minor assault
        • 10 Attempted robbery without injury
        • 11 Completed aggravated assault with injury
        • 12 Attempted aggravated assault with weapon
        • 13 Threatened assault with weapon
        • 14 Simple assault completed with injury
        • 15 Sexual assault without injury
        • 16 Unwanted sexual contact without force
        • 17 Assault without weapon without injury
        • 18 Verbal threat of rape
        • 19 Verbal threat of sexual assault
        • 20 Verbal threat of assault

        Purse snatching/pocket picking

        • 21 Completed purse snatching
        • 22 Attempted purse snatching
        • 23 Pocket picking (completed only)

        Property crimes

        • 31 Completed burglary, forcible entry
        • 32 Completed burglary, unlawful entry without force
        • 33 Attempted forcible entry
        • 40 Completed motor vehicle theft
        • 41 Attempted motor vehicle theft
        • 54 Completed theft less than $10
        • 55 Completed theft $10 to $49
        • 56 Completed theft $50 to $249
        • 57 Completed theft $250 or greater
        • 58 Completed theft value NA
        • 59 Attempted theft
      Data Collection Frequency: 
      Annual
      Methodology Notes: 

        Responses to over 70 questions are used to determine whether a respondent is classified as a victim and to classify the type of crime experienced. The exact wording of these questions can be found in the NCVS survey instruments: See 2013 NCVS-1 (Basic Screen Questionnaire) and NCVS-2 (Crime Incident Report) survey instruments at Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). The measure can also be recreated using the public use variable listed "v4529". To access the public use data file, visit:
        https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/series/95.

        The definition of victimization is a crime as it affects one person or a household. For personal crimes, the number of victimizations is equal to the number of victims present during a criminal incident so that the number of victimizations may be greater than the number of incidents because more than one person may be victimized during an incident. The victimization rate is a measure of the occurrence of victimizations among a specified population group. For personal crimes, the victimization rate among adolescents and young adults is based on the number of victimizations per 1000 residents aged 12 to 24 years.

      Revision History

      Any change to the objective text, baseline, target, target-setting method or data source since the Healthy People 2020 launch.

      Description of Changes Since the Healthy People 2020 Launch: 
      In 2015, this objective moved to measurable. The baseline was set as 42.0 victimizations per 1,000 population aged 12-24 in 2013. The target was set as 37.8 per 1,000, a 10% improvement over the baseline.

      References

      Additional resources about the objective