The Origins of the Columbus Metro’s Domestic Migration

Top 30 Largest Net Domestic In-Migration Origins (Ohio Counties and States)

2006-2010————————2009-2013—————————-2010-2014
1. Cuyahoga: 1602———-1. Cuyahoga: 1905————–1. Cuyahoga: 1702
2. Montgomery: 1020——-2. Michigan: 1425—————-2. Michigan: 1473
3. Michigan: 893————-3. Montgomery: 1123————3. Montgomery: 1098
4. Maryland: 745————-4. Summit: 744——————–4. Washington (state): 740
5. Lorain: 740—————–5. Lorain: 715———————-5. Summit: 689
6. Virginia: 636—————6. Indiana: 694———————6. Lucas: 635
7. Mahoning: 603————7. Lucas: 569———————–7. Stark: 632
8. Stark: 584——————8. Maryland: 512——————-8. New Jersey: 579
9. Lucas: 554—————–9. Hamilton: 504——————–9. Indiana: 536
10. Summit: 531————-10. Clermont: 466—————–10. Medina: 465
11. Highland: 499———–11. Stark: 466———————–11. Richland: 465
12. New Jersey: 497——-12. Arizona: 463——————–12. Fayette: 436
13. Hamilton: 483———–13. Alabama: 431——————-13. Trumbull: 404
14. New York: 419———-14. Trumbull: 401——————-14. Wayne: 383
15. Allen: 384—————-15. Mahoning: 387——————15. Erie: 368
16. Tennessee: 375——–16. Fayette: 354———————16. Clermont: 355
17. Logan: 328—————17. Washington (state): 353—–17. Illinois: 355
18. Trumbull: 325————18. Coshocton: 346—————-18. Massachusetts: 325
19. Coshocton: 310———19. Medina: 322——————–19. Allen: 320
20. Jefferson: 290———–20. Allen: 302————————20. Maryland: 294
21. Scioto: 259—————21. Erie: 290————————-21. Butler: 275
22. Belmont: 254————22. Highland: 270——————-22. Puerto Rico: 268
23. Huron: 245—————23. Puerto Rico: 265—————23. Lake: 267
24. Darke: 217—————24. Adams: 260———————24. West Virginia: 257
25. Lake: 212—————-25. Warren: 260———————25. Highland: 256
26. Tuscarawas: 202——-26. Massachusetts: 259———-26. Lorain: 249
27. Iowa: 200—————–27. Wayne: 259———————27. Mahoning: 244
28. Shelby: 199————–28. Morgan: 255——————–28. Adams: 226
29. Medina: 196————-29. Tuscarawas: 253————–29. Columbiana: 225
30. Massachusetts: 192—30. Ashtabula: 244—————–30. Arizona: 221

Top 30 Largest Net Domestic Out-Migration Destinations (Ohio counties and States)

2006-2010——————————-2009-2013—————————-2010-2014
1. Texas: -1371———————-1. Georgia: -1024—————-1. Florida: -1243
2. Knox: -942————————-2. Florida: -1013——————2. Georgia: -984
3. North Carolina: -782————3. Greene: -524——————-3. Knox: -608
4. Georgia: -718———————4. Missouri: -516——————4. Colorado: -456
5. Athens: -679———————-5. Colorado: -448—————–5. Minnesota: -405
6. Kentucky: -516——————-6. California: -436—————–6. California: -396
7. South Carolina: -499———–7. South Carolina: -431———-7. Greene: -382
8. California: -364——————-8. Knox: -418———————-8. Athens: -375
9. Florida: -360———————-9. North Carolina: -417———-9. Missouri: -348
10. Wood: -351———————10. Wisconsin: -395————–10. Utah: -325
11. Richland: -344——————11. Athens: -336——————11. Tennessee: -264
12. Greene: -239——————–12. Minnesota: -308————-12. Logan: -242
13. West Virginia: -236————13. Utah: -290———————13. Mississippi: -214
14. Missouri: -219——————-14. Richland: -266—————14. Wisconsin: -197
15. Crawford: -209——————15. Portage: -265—————–15. Oregon: -161
16. Hardin: -179———————16. Kentucky: -257—————16. Texas: -156
17. Noble: -177———————-17. Logan: -242——————-17. South Carolina: -144
18. Muskingum: -175—————18. Pennsylvania: -242———18. Seneca: -141
19. Butler: -173———————-19. Tennessee: -200————19. Louisiana: -140
20. Holmes: -163——————–20. Oregon: -187—————-20. Sandusky: -134
21. Marion: -138———————21. Wood: -166——————21. Wood: -134
22. Portage: -134——————-22. Sandusky: -157————–22. Darke: -109
23. Ottawa: -131——————–23. Mississippi: -151————-23. Jefferson: -103
24. Sandusky: -124—————-24. Jefferson: -127—————24. Noble: -98
25. Oregon: -120——————-25. Kansas: -98——————-25. Hardin: -96
26. Indiana: -116——————-26. Delaware (state): -88——-26. Idaho: -89
27. Idaho: -115———————27. Idaho: -74———————-27. Kansas: -81
28. Utah: -103———————- 28. Crawford: -73—————–28. Marion: -78
29. Fayette: -93———————29. Hardin: -68——————–29. Meigs: -70
30. Kansas: -90———————30. Seneca: -66——————-30. Ottawa: -67

Top 25 Largest Positive Swings Between 2006-2010 and 2010-2014
1. Texas: +1215
2. North Carolina: +808
3. Washington: +807
4. Kentucky: +675
5. Indiana: +652
6. Michigan: +580
7. West Virginia: +493
8. Athens: +369
9. Knox: +358
10. South Carolina: +355
11. Arizona: +288
12. Alaska: +283
13. Puerto Rico: +268
14. Illinois: +236
15. Hardin: +198
16. Marion: +187
17. Maine: +160
18. Alabama: +153
19. Logan: +149
20. Darke: +139
21. Massachusetts: +133
22. Rhode Island: +131
23. Wyoming: +127
24. Greene: +104
25. Champaign: +101

Top 25 Largest Negative Swings Between 2006-2010 and 2010-2014
1. Florida: -883
2. Tennessee: -639
3. Colorado: -619
4. Virginia: -595
5. Minnesota: -529
6. Maryland: -451
7. Lucas: -392
8. Montgomery: -384
9. New York: -308
10. Cuyahoga: -288
11. Muskingum: -276
12. Georgia: -266
13. Stark: -246
14. Utah: -222
15. Wisconsin: -215
16. Hamilton: -193
17. Scioto: -170
18. Miami: -154
19. Mississippi: -150
20. Clermont: -142
21. New Mexico: -140
22. Louisiana: -137
23. Mahoning: -131
24. Missouri: -129
25. Pennsylvania: -116

Total Counts By Period
Positive Ohio Counties
2006-2010: 53
2009-2013: 57
2010-2014: 53

Positive States, including DC and Puerto Rico
2006-2010: 21
2009-2013: 24
2010-2014: 29

Total Net In-Migration
Ohio
2006-2010: +8,008
2009-2013: +11,366
2010-2014: +10,101

Outside Ohio
2006-2010: -1,158
2009-2013: -466
2010-2014: +1,007

Ohio and Outside Ohio
2006-2010: +6,850
2009-2013: +10,900
2010-2014: +11,108

All these figures show that the Columbus metro has net positive domestic migration. While the majority of that comes from within the state, Columbus’ previously negative net total from outside the state has more recently become positive as well. Combined, the net total has been climbing. For a long time, Columbus’ relative success was not well-known outside of the state, but perhaps word is finally getting out.

2014 County Population Estimates

New county population estimates were released Thursday. Franklin County had its 2nd highest growth year since 1970 and within a few years of passing Cuyahoga County to become the most populated in Ohio.

Top 25 Largest Ohio Counties and Rank for Census 2010, July 1, 2013 and July 1, 2014
2010                                  2013                                2014
1. Cuyahoga: 1,280,122–1. Cuyahoga: 1,265,889–1. Cuyahoga: 1,259,828
2. Franklin: 1,163,414—–2. Franklin: 1,213,834——2. Franklin: 1,231,393
3. Hamilton: 802,374——3. Hamilton: 804,429——-3. Hamilton: 806,631
4. Summit: 541,781——–4. Summit: 541,787———4. Summit: 541,943
5. Montgomery: 535,153–5. Montgomery: 534,764–5. Montgomery: 533,116
6. Lucas: 441,815———-6. Lucas: 436,803———–6. Lucas: 435,286
7. Stark: 375,586———–7. Stark: 375,222————7. Stark: 375,736
8. Butler: 368,130———-8. Butler: 371,511————8. Butler: 374,158
9. Lorain: 301,356———-9. Lorain: 303,306———–9. Lorain: 304,216
10. Mahoning: 238,823—10. Mahoning: 234,336—-10. Mahoning: 233,204
11. Lake: 230,041———-11. Lake: 229,634———–11. Lake: 229,230
12. Warren: 212,693——-12. Warren: 219,578——-12. Warren: 221,659
13. Trumbull: 210,312—–13. Trumbull: 206,480——13. Trumbull: 205,175
14. Clermont: 197,363—–14. Clermont: 200,254—–14. Clermont: 201,560
15. Delaware: 174,214—-15. Delaware: 185,202—–15. Delaware: 189,113
16. Medina: 172,332——-16. Medina: 174,792——–16. Medina: 176,029
17. Licking: 166,492——–17. Licking: 168,503——–17. Licking: 169,390
18. Greene: 161,573——-18. Greene: 163,465——–18. Greene: 163,820
19. Portage: 161,419——-19. Portage: 161,423——-19. Portage: 161,882
20. Fairfield: 146,156——-20. Fairfield: 148,797——-20. Fairfield: 150,381
21. Clark: 138,333———-21. Clark: 136,803———–21. Clark: 136,554
22. Wood: 125,488———22. Wood: 129,209———-22. Wood: 129,590
23. Richland: 124,475—–23. Richland: 122,292——23. Richland: 121,942
24. Wayne: 114,520——-24. Wayne: 115,144———24. Wayne: 115,537
25. Columbiana: 107,841–25. Columbiana: 105,885–25. Columbiana: 105,686

Top 25 Counties with the Largest Numerical Growth, July 1, 2013 to July 1, 2014
1. Franklin: +17,559
2. Delaware: +3,911
3. Butler: +2,647
4. Hamilton: +2,202
5. Warren: +2,081
6. Fairfield: +1,584
7. Clermont: +1,306
8. Lorain: +1,210
9. Licking: +887
10. Madison: +646
11. Stark: +514
12. Miami: +484
13. Portage: +459
14. Pickaway: +410
15. Union: +396
16. Wayne: +393
17. Wood: +381
18. Greene: +355
19. Knox: +244
20. Holmes: +236
21. Geauga: +236
22. Athens: +198
23. Fulton: +162
24. Summit: +156
25. Muskingum: +122

Top 25 Counties with the Largest Numerical Growth, Census 2010 to July 1, 2014
1. Franklin: +67,850
2. Delaware: +14,924
3. Warren: +8,791
4. Butler: +6,028
5. Hamilton: +4,257
6. Fairfield: +4,229
7. Clermont: +4,197
8. Wood: +4,102
9. Medina: +3,696
10. Licking: +2,906
11. Lorain: +2,860
12. Greene: +2,251
13. Holmes: +1,532
14. Union: +1,509
15. Miami: +1,394
16. Pickaway: +1,178
17. Wayne: +1,023
18. Geauga: +885
19. Hancock: +555
20. Madison: +488
21. Portage: +461
22. Morrow: +325
23. Knox: +237
24. Tuscarawas: +206
25. Summit: +157

Top 25 Counties for Total Birth July 1, 2013 to July 1, 2014
1. Franklin: 18,595
2. Cuyahoga: 14,801
3. Hamilton: 11,009
4. Montgomery: 6,708
5. Summit: 6,235
6. Lucas: 5,742
7. Butler: 4,572
8. Stark: 4,106
9. Lorain: 3,340
10. Warren: 2,396
11. Mahoning: 2,369
12. Clermont: 2,357
13. Lake: 2,204
14. Delaware: 2,119
15. Trumbull: 2,070
16. Licking: 1,948
17. Greene: 1,757
18. Medina: 1,732
19. Fairfield: 1,647
20. Clark: 1,567
21. Wayne: 1,501
22. Richland: 1,413
23. Wood: 1,370
24. Portage: 1,369
25. Allen: 1,288

Top 25 Counties for Total Deaths July 1, 2013 to July 1, 2014

1. Cuyahoga: 13,316
2. Franklin: 9,197
3. Hamilton: 7,718
4. Montgomery: 5,632
5. Summit: 5,595
6. Lucas: 4,365
7. Stark: 3,910
8. Butler: 3,186
9. Mahoning: 2,957
10. Trumbull: 2,407
11. Lake: 2,366
12. Warren: 1,636
13. Clark: 1,631
14. Clermont: 1,574
15. Licking: 1,505
16. Medina: 1,352
17. Greene: 1,350
18. Portage: 1,329
19. Richland: 1,313
20. Fairfield: 1,233
21. Columbiana: 1,140
22. Ashtabula: 1,092
23. Allen: 1,063
24. Wayne: 1,055
25. Delaware: 1,019

Top 25 Counties for Total Natural Change (Births vs. Deaths) July 1, 2013 to July 1, 2014

1. Franklin: 9,398
2. Hamilton: 3,291
3. Cuyahoga: 1,481
4. Lucas: 1,377
5. Butler: 1,386
6. Delaware: 1,100
7. Montgomery: 1,076
8. Clermont: 783
9. Warren: 760
10. Summit: 640
11. Lorain: 546
12. Holmes: 506
13. Wayne: 446
14. Licking: 443
15. Fairfield: 414
16. Greene: 407
17. Medina: 380
18. Wood: 359
19. Union: 271
20. Hancock: 249
21. Allen: 225
22. Shelby: 212
23. Geauga: 199
24. Stark: 196
25. Huron: 165

Metro Comparison- 2nd Annual Edition

Last summer, I compared the Columbus metro with its national peers, a collection of metros ranging from 1.5 to 2.5 million in population. You can see that comparison here: http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=661 and here: http://allcolumbusdata.com/?p=678

The recent release of updated population numbers prompted the need for an updated look. I focused on population density previously. This time, I wanted to expand that focus to include migration trends.

Metro Area Population on July 1, 2012 and July 1, 2013 By Rank
2012——————-2013
1. Pittsburgh: 2,360,989— 1. Pittsburgh: 2,360,867
2. Charlotte: 2,294,990—2. Charlotte: 2,335,358
3. Portland, OR: 2,289,038—3. Portland, OR: 2,314,554
4. San Antonio, TX: 2,234,494—4. San Antonio, TX: 2,277,550
5. Orlando: 2,223,456—5. Orlando: 2,267,846
6. Sacramento, CA: 2,193,927—6. Sacramento, CA: 2,215,770
7. Cincinnati: 2,129,309—7. Cincinnati: 2,137,406
8. Cleveland: 2,064,739—8. Cleveland: 2,064,725
9. Kansas City: 2,038,690—9. Kansas City: 2,054,473
10. Las Vegas: 1,997,659—10. Las Vegas: 2,027,868
11. Columbus: 1,944,937—11. Columbus: 1,967,066
12. Indianapolis: 1,929,207—12. Indianapolis: 1,953,961
13. San Jose, CA: 1,892,894—13. San Jose, CA: 1,919,641
14. Austin, TX: 1,835,110— 14. Austin, TX: 1,883,051
15. Nashville: 1,726,759—15. Nashville: 1,757,912
16. Virginia Beach, VA: 1,698,410—16. Virginia Beach, VA: 1,707,369
17. Providence, RI: 1,601,160—17. Providence, RI: 1,604,291
18. Milwaukee: 1,566,182—18. Milwaukee: 1,569,659

Total Metro Population Change, 2012-2013, By Rank
1. Austin: +47,941
2. Orlando: +44,390
3. San Antonio: +43,056
4. Charlotte: +40,368
5. Nashville: +31,153
6. Las Vegas: +30,209
7. San Jose: +26,747
8. Portland: +25,516
9. Indianapolis: +24,754
10. Columbus: +22,129
11. Sacramento: +21,843
12. Kansas City: +15,783
13. Virginia Beach: +8,959
14. Cincinnati: +8,097
15. Milwaukee: +3,477
16. Providence: +3,131
17. Cleveland: -14
18. Pittsburgh: -122

Average Annual Population Change from 2000-2010 vs. 2010-2013
2000-2010—————-2010-2013
1. Charlotte: +88,657— 1. Austin: +55,587
2. Las Vegas: +57,550— 2. San Antonio: +45,014
3. Orlando: +48,985— 3. Orlando: +44,478
4. Austin: +46,653— 4. Charlotte: +39,447
5. San Antonio: +43,081— 5. Portland: +29,515
6. Indianapolis: +36,277— 6. Nashville: +29,007
7. Nashville: +35,910— 7. San Jose: +27,577
8. Sacramento: +35,227— 8. Las Vegas: +25,553
9. Portland: +29,819— 9. Sacramento: +22,214
10. Columbus: +28,928— 10. Indianapolis: +22,028
11. Kansas City: +17,330— 11. Columbus: +21,697
12. Cincinnati: +10,495— 12. Kansas City: +15,134
13. San Jose: +10,109— 13. Virginia Beach: +10.182
14. Virginia Beach: +10,045— 14. Cincinnati: +7,609
15. Milwaukee: +5,517— 15. Milwaukee: +4,584
16. Providence: +1,846— 16. Pittsburgh: +1,527
17. Cleveland: -7,090— 17. Providence: +1,146
18. Pittsburgh: -7,480— 18. Cleveland: -4,172

Annual Growth Rate % Change 2000-2010 vs. 2010-2013**
1. San Jose: +172.8%
2. Pittsburgh: +120.4%
3. Cleveland: +69.9%
4. Austin: +19.1%
5. San Antonio: +4.5%
6. Virginia Beach: +1.4%
7. Portland: -1.0%
8. Orlando: -9.2%
9. Kansas City: -12.7%
10. Milwaukee: -16.9%
11. Nashville: -19.2%
12. Columbus: -25.0%
13. Cincinnati: -27.5%
14. Sacramento: -36.9%
15. Providence: -37.9%
16. Indianapolis: -39.3%
17. Charlotte: -55.5%
18. Las Vegas: -55.6%

**Some of the changes in rates are due to boundary changes.  For example, part of the growth rate for Columbus 2000-2010 was a retroactive population addition when boundaries were changed in 2013.  The actual growth rate changed very little. 

Metro Area Density 2012 vs. 2013
2012——2013
1. Cleveland: 1,033.3—Cleveland: 1,033.9
2. Providence: 978.8— 2. Providence: 980.6
3. Milwaukee: 859.6— 3. Milwaukee: 861.0
4. San Jose: 702.9— 4. San Jose: 712.3
5. Virginia Beach: 642.2— 5. Orlando: 649.6
6. Orlando: 637.0—  6. Virginia Beach: 645.0
7. Cincinnati: 484.4— 7. Cincinnati: 486.4
8. Indianapolis: 444.4— 8. Charlotte: 450.8
9. Charlotte: 443.4— 9. Indianapolis: 450.1
10. Austin: 428.6—-  10. Austin: 440.0
11. Pittsburgh: 413.7—  11. Pittsburgh: 413.8
12. Columbus: 400.8— 12. Columbus: 405.6
13. Portland: 335.9— 13. Portland: 339.5
14. Sacramento: 316.7— 14. Sacramento: 319.5
15. San Antonio: 302.4— 15. San Antonio: 308.3
16. Kansas City: 276.5— 16. Kansas City: 278.6
17. Nashville: 270.7— 17. Nashville: 275.6
18. Las Vegas: 247.3— 18. Las Vegas: 250.6

Total Births 2012 vs. 2013
2012————2013
1. San Antonio: +31,045— 1. San Antonio: +31,527
2. Kansas City: +28,087— 2. Kansas City: +27,937
3. Cincinnati: +27,803— 3. Sacramento: +27,865
4. Portland: +27,683— 4. Portland: +27,762
5. Sacramento: +27,649— 5. Cincinnati: +27,545
6. Orlando: +27,165— 6. Orlando: +27,484
7. Las Vegas: +26,385— 7. Las Vegas: +26,616
8. Columbus: +25,904— 8. Columbus: +25,740
9. Indianapolis: +25,472— 9. Austin: +25,519
10. Austin: +25,015 — 10. Indianapolis: +25,507
11. Charlotte: +24,415— 11. Charlotte: +24,437
12. San Jose: +24,240— 12. San Jose: +24,386
13. Pittsburgh: +24,006— 13. Pittsburgh: +23,938
14. Cleveland: +23,227— 14. Cleveland: +23,204
15. Virginia Beach: +22,799— 15. Virginia Beach: +22,773
16. Nashville: +21,641— 16. Nashville: +21,714
17. Milwaukee: +20,125— 17. Milwaukee: +19,963
18. Providence: +16,761— 18. Providence: +16,668

Total Deaths 2012 vs. 2013
2012————-2013
1. Austin: -8,732— 1. Austin: -8,859
2. San Jose: -9,965— 2. San Jose: -10,319
3. Nashville: -12,187— 3. Nashville: -12,327
4. Charlotte: -12,241— 4. Charlotte: -12,396
5. Virginia Beach: -12,801— 5. Milwaukee: -12,856
6. Milwaukee: -12,836— 6. Virginia Beach: -13,094
7. Indianapolis: -13,520— 7. Indianapolis: -13,414
8. Columbus: -13,938— 8. Columbus: -14,118
9. Las Vegas: -14,311— 9. Providence: -14,387
10. Providence: -14,568— 10. Las Vegas: -14,462
11. San Antonio: -15,367— 11. San Antonio: -15,593
12. Orlando: -15,419— 12. Orlando: -15,882
13. Sacramento: -15,973— 13. Sacramento: -16,133
14. Portland: -16,013— 14. Portland: -16,155
15. Kansas City: -16,255— 15. Kansas City: -16,254
16. Cincinnati: -18,477— 16. Cincinnati: -18,490
17. Cleveland: -20,708— 17. Cleveland: -20,326
18. Pittsburgh: -27,310— 18. Pittsburgh: -27,070

Net Natural Growth (Births vs. Deaths) 2012 vs. 2013
2012—————–2013
1. Austin: +16,283— 1. Austin: +16,660
2. San Antonio: +15,678— 2. San Antonio: +15,934
3. San Jose: +14,275— 3. San Jose: +14,067
4. Charlotte: +12,174—  4. Las Vegas: +11,622
5. Las Vegas: +12,074— 5. Indianapolis: +12,093
6. Columbus: +11,966— 6. Charlotte: +12,041
7. Indianapolis: +11,952— 7. Sacramento: +11,732
8. Kansas City: +11,862— 8. Kansas City: +11,683
9. Orlando: +11,746— 9. Columbus: +11,622
10. Sacramento: +11,676— 10. Portland: +11,607
11. Portland: +11,670— 11. Orlando: +11,602
12. Virginia Beach: +9,998— 12. Virginia Beach: +9,679
13. Nashville: +9,454— 13. Nashville: +9,387
14. Cincinnati: +9,326— 14. Cincinnati: +9,055
15. Milwaukee: +7,289— 15. Milwaukee: +7,107
16. Cleveland: +2,519— 16. Cleveland: +2,878
17. Providence: +2,193— 17. Providence; +2,281
18. Pittsburgh: -3,310— 18. Pittsburgh: -3,132

Domestic In-Migration 2012 vs. 2013
2012—————2013
1. Austin: +31,041— 1. Austin: +25,908
2. Orlando: +22,667— 2. San Antonio: +22,392
3. San Antonio: +21,908— 3. Charlotte: +21,382
4. Charlotte: +18,000— 4. Nashville: +17,975
5. Nashville: +14,946— 5. Orlando: +17,316
6. Las Vegas: +12,315— 6. Las Vegas: +10,524
7. Portland: +11,767— 7. Indianapolis: +8,934
8. Indianapolis: +4,146— 8. Portland: +7,901
9. Columbus: +3,275— 9. Columbus: +5,749
10. Pittsburgh: +1,963— 10. Sacramento: +3,329
11. Sacramento: +1,302— 11. Kansas City: +771
12. Kansas City: -1,061— 12. Pittsburgh: +590
13. San Jose: -2,304— 13. San Jose: -1,397
14. Milwaukee: -4,291— 14. Providence: -3,721
15. Providence: -5,210— 15. Cincinnati: -3,894
16. Virginia Beach: -5,950— 16. Cleveland: -5,581
17. Cincinnati: -6,024— 17. Milwaukee: -5,663
18. Cleveland: -9,990— 18. Virginia Beach: -5,920

International In-Migration 2012 vs. 2013
2012————–2013
1. Orlando: +14,506— 1. Orlando: +14,725
2. San Jose: +13,728— 2. San Jose: +14,124
3. Virginia Beach: +7,562— 3. Las Vegas: +6,506
4. Las Vegas: +6,606— 4. Sacramento: +6,071
5. Sacramento: +5,921— 5. Austin: +5,322
6. Austin: +5,199— 6. Portland: +5,280
7. Portland: +5,109— 7. Virginia Beach: +5,037
8. Columbus: +4,654— 8. Charlotte: +4,996
9. Providence: +4,637— 9. Columbus: +4,689
10. Charlotte: +4,573— 10. Providence: +4,563
11. San Antonio: +4,441— 11. Indianapolis: +4,064
12. Indianapolis: +3,958— 12. Cleveland: +3,698
13. Cleveland: +3,647— 13. San Antonio: +3,469
14. Nashville: +3,305— 14. Nashville: +3,463
15. Cincinnati: +3,268— 15. Cincinnati: +3,326
16. Kansas City: +3,164— 16. Kansas City: +3,119
17. Pittsburgh: +2,767— 17. Pittsburgh: +2,778
18. Milwaukee: +2,179— 18. Milwaukee: +2,233

Net In-Migration Total 2012 vs. 2013
2012—————-2013
1. Orlando: +37,173— 1. Orlando: +32,041
2. Austin: +36,240— 2. Austin: +31,230
3. San Antonio: +25,949— 3. Charlotte: +26,378
4. Charlotte: +22,573— 4. San Antonio: +25,861
5. Las Vegas: +18,921— 5. Nashville: +21,428
6. Nashville: +18,251— 6. Las Vegas: +17,030
7. Portland: +16,876— 7. Portland: +13,181
8. San Jose: +11,424— 8. Indianapolis: +12,998
9. Indianapolis: +8,104— 9. San Jose: +12,727
10. Columbus: +7,929— 10. Columbus: +10,438
11. Sacramento: +7,223— 11. Sacramento: +9,400
12. Pittsburgh: +4,730— 12. Kansas City: +3,890
13. Kansas City: +2,103— 13. Pittsburgh: +3,368
14. Virginia Beach: +1,612— 14. Providence: +842
15. Providence: -573— 15. Cincinnati: -568
16. Milwaukee: -2,112— 16. Virginia Beach: -883
17. Cincinnati: -2,756— 17. Cleveland: -1,883
18. Cleveland: -6,343— 18. Milwaukee: -3,430

Ohio’s Improving Growth Outlook

Back in November, I wrote about Ohio’s improving domestic growth picture. In that post, I examined domestic out-migration and domestic in-migration 2005-2012, and discovered that the net change had been improving. The state was losing fewer people over time domestically, and the difference had declined to under 2,000 people by 2012, a HUGE improvement from the start of the period.

Recently, the US Census released 2013 state population estimates, along with components of population change for the July 1st, 2012-July 1st, 2013 period. More positive news was to be found in those estimates.

First, Ohio’s population increased to 11,570,808, representing an annual increase of 17,777. While the increase is not particularly great, especially in comparison to states nationally, there are some positive nuggets with that number. The state held on to its position as the 7th most populous state, and the increase was the highest since pre-recession. The state moved up 18 spots in the total annual growth rankings 2012-2013 vs. 2011-2012. This was the best increase of all 50 states. It was also the best growth for the state since 2007.

Online Graphing
Create a graph

Did the state bottom out in 2012? Perhaps, but way too early to tell. Still, a very good improvement that halted a general decline.

The components of change are also interesting.

Online Graphing
chart

The migration patterns show a few things. First, 2013 had the 2nd highest rate since 2000 of in-international migration. It was also one of the best years (since 1996) for domestic in-migration.

The question is, can Ohio keep improving or is this just a temporary blip? Time will tell.

Ohio Domestic Migration 2005-2012

Ohio has been growing fairly slowly for several decades now. In fact, if it was not for Columbus’ population growth and international migration, the state would’ve been losing population in recent years. But is the picture really that bad? Are things changing? I decided to find out.

Online Graphing
Make a graph

The first chart above shows the total population that moved to Ohio from all other 49 states plus Puerto Rico and DC by year. The drop during the recession is pretty obvious, as mobility greatly decreased during that time. 2012 had the 2nd highest total of the period, only slightly behind 2006.

Online Graphing
graph and chart

What the out-migration chart shows is that the total is gradually going down, meaning fewer people, on average, are leaving Ohio each year. So what is the overall difference of in vs. out migration to Ohio?

Online Graphing
Graphing

As the chart shows, the trend has been improving over time, and 2012 barely registered a loss at all. Will the state begin seeing positive domestic in-migration in the very near future? Based on this chart, the answer seems to be yes. A lot can still happen, but it does appear that Ohio is finally shaking off its long-term population issues.

State Charts
Online Graphing
Graphing
Online Graphing
graph and charts
Online Graphing
graph
Online Graphing
Make a graph
Online Graphing
graph and charts
Online Graphing
graph
Online Graphing
Make a graph
Online Graphing
chart