What is
New Hampshire?
An overview of issues shaping
the Granite State’s future
September 2014
If you found this report useful, consider supporting the Center today.
Any contribution works to help keep these reports coming!
The Center’s continued independent and objective voice is only possible because of the
generosity of donors like you.
Authors
Stephen Norton
Executive Director
Daniel Barrick
Deputy Director
Dennis Delay
Economist
Katherine Decker
Intern
About this paper
The New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies compiled the information and analysis in
this report for the use of Leadership New Hampshire, a program intended to introduce rising
leaders to the people, strengths, and challenges of the Granite State. The Center is grateful for the
opportunity to present this material to the Leadership New Hampshire participants and to all
others seeking an overview of information about the state. The Center has produced this report
with funds donated by individuals, foundations, and businesses from across New Hampshire. The
Center’s supporters do not necessarily endorse, nor has the Center asked them to endorse, any of
the materials included in this report. The Center, not Leadership New Hampshire, determined
what to include in this report.
This paper, like all of our published work, is in the public domain and may be reproduced without
permission. Indeed, the Center welcomes individuals’ and groups’ efforts to expand the paper’s
circulation.
Copies are available at no charge on the Center’s web site: www.nhpolicy.org. Many of the pages
that follow are excerpts from other Center reports, all of which are available at the same site. We
have also prepared a selection of interactive maps and data sets that display much of the
information detailed in this report. Those can be found on our website as well.
Contact the Center at [email protected]; or call 603-226-2500.
Write to: NHCPPS, 1 Eagle Square, Suite 510, Concord, NH 03301
WHAT IS NEW HAMPSHIRE?
2014 Edition
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS NEW HAMPSHIRE? .............................................................................................. 1
DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE ............................................................................................ 2
NEW HAMPSHIRE’S ECONOMY .......................................................................................................................... 6
EDUCATION IN NEW HAMPSHIRE ................................................................................................................... 15
HEALTH CARE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE .............................................................................................................. 26
NEW HAMPSHIRE’S STATE BUDGET ............................................................................................................... 33
NATURAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................ 43
ENERGY IN NEW HAMPSHIRE ........................................................................................................................... 47
CRIME AND CORRECTIONS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE ...................................................................................... 52
APPENDIX: NEW HAMPSHIRE’S REGIONS .................................................................................................... 58
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
1
Introduction: What is New Hampshire?
Throughout its history, New Hampshire has worn many identities: agricultural outpost on the
edge of New England; bustling engine of the Industrial Revolution; oasis for nature-seeking
tourists; haven for tax-fleeing transplants. In the early years of the 21st Century, New Hampshire
is still evolving amid shifting economic, demographic, social and political forces. Among the
new trends shaping the “new” New Hampshire: an aging population; increasing racial and ethnic
diversity; a shift away from the high-growth economic model of the past; and continued demand
on the state budget for public services.
While the implications of these and other challenges are still unclear, they do raise critical policy
questions, including:

Economy: New Hampshire suffered the effects of the Great Recession less severely than
many other states, but slow job growth continues to gnaw at the state’s economy. As of
the summer of 2014, New Hampshire lagged behind the nation and the rest of New
England in recovering jobs lost during the recession. What is the state’s economic
development plan, especially in relation to demographic trends that show New
Hampshire’s population growth slowing in coming years? What specific industries or
regions of New Hampshire will help shape the state’s economy in coming years? What
regional approaches to economic development will find greatest success?

Demographic change: While New Hampshire is consistently rated one of the best places
in the country to raise children, our population as a whole continues to age. Meanwhile,
our school enrollment continues on a decade-long decline, and several measures of youth
well-being in the state show worrisome trends, including rising levels of childhood
poverty. What are the implications of these developments on education policy, housing,
public services and transportation?

Health care: New Hampshire’s health policy landscape faces great uncertainty amid
recent reforms at the national level, as well as continued rises in cost and the continued
aging of the state’s population. What impact will the shifting health marketplace have on
New Hampshire’s economy and the well-being of its residents?

Long-term planning: State policymakers face a long list of critical issues in coming
years: public infrastructure investment, education finance, corrections spending, health
care, and energy policy, among others. Many of these require a long-term perspective and
an understanding of multi-year trends. How will the state – which has a two-year budget
cycle and a two-year term for all major state offices – manage to plan decades into the
future?
This report is our annual survey of the major policy issues and critical questions shaping our
future. The data explain where New Hampshire has been, forecast where it is heading, and
explore how current trends and policy choices facing the state will affect the well-being of its
citizens.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
2
Demographic change in New Hampshire
New Hampshire had been the fastest growing state in the Northeast for years, fueled by high
rates of domestic in-migration, largely from Massachusetts. With the arrival of these newcomers,
the average educational attainment and income levels of New Hampshire residents increased
over that period. Those trends, in turn, helped fuel the state’s strong economic growth of recent
decades.
But these migration patterns have changed over the course of the Great Recession, a fact that will
have real implications for New Hampshire’s future. As we will see below, migration into New
Hampshire has slowed considerably over the past decade, and the state is not expected to return
to the past pattern of high growth for the foreseeable future.
New Hampshire’s people: By the numbers
Compared to the rest of the country, New Hampshire’s population is older, less racially diverse,
better educated, wealthier, and more likely to have moved here from another state.
 Average age:
o New Hampshire: 41.5 years
o United States: 37.3 years
 Percent of the population that is white:
o New Hampshire: 96 percent
o United States: 76 percent
 Percent of the population with a high school diploma or higher:
o New Hampshire: 91 percent
o United States: 86 percent
 Percent of housing units that are owner-occupied:
o New Hampshire: 72 percent
o United States: 65 percent
 Median household income:
o New Hampshire: $64,900
o United States: $53,000
 Poverty rate:
o New Hampshire: 8.4 percent
o United States: 14.9 percent
 Percent of state residents born in another state:
o New Hampshire: 51 percent
o United States: 27 percent
New Hampshire’s high growth years are in the past
Through the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, New Hampshire saw high rates of population growth, with
three consecutive decades of growth of 20 percent or more. That pace of growth came in the
middle of a period of economic expansion and rising wages.
Since then, the state’s population growth rates have fallen steadily. For the decade between 2000
and 2010, New Hampshire’s growth rate fell to 6.5 percent, still the highest rate in the Northeast
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
3
but the state’s slowest decade of growth since before World War II. The national percent change
in population from 2000 to 2010 was 9.7 percent.
What is the source of this decline? Put simply, fewer people have been moving into the state in
recent years, and New Hampshire has even seen net out-migration in several of the past few
years. Domestic migration has remained about the same from 2009 to 2011, with annual losses
of roughly 2,000 people per year.
Ten Year Percent Change in New Hampshire Population by Decade End
Actual
Forecast
24.8%
21.5%
20.5%
13.8%
11.4%
8.5%
6.5%
3.3%
3.8%
1.1%
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
For the forecast years beyond 2010, New Hampshire population growth rates are expected to
continue to decline – with 3.3 percent growth from 2010 to 2020 and 3.8 percent growth from
2020 to 2030 according to the New Hampshire Office of Energy and Planning’s 2012 population
projections. Growth in the decade beyond that (2030 to 2040) is forecast to be essentially flat, at
just over 1 percent for the period.
New Hampshire will grow older with fewer young people
The year 2020 will see the beginning of a shift in New Hampshire’s population towards the over65 population. By then, residents 65 years and older will account for nearly 20 percent of the
state population, up from 13.5 percent in 2010. This will be due in large part to the aging of the
“Baby Boom” generation – generally speaking, those people born between 1946 and 1964.
The growth rate from 2030 to 2040 in the above-65 population (9.7 percent) is predicted to be
the lowest growth rate since the decade preceding 1920. The likely causes of this lower growth
are the last of the “Baby Boomer” generation having entered into the 65+ cohort during the
preceding decade and the already significant amount of people age 65 and over.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
4
New Hampshire will have a higher proportion of elderly residents in the future
NH Population Age 65 and Over:
Number (left scale) and Percent of Total (right scale)
500,000
100%
450,000
90%
400,000
80%
350,000
70%
300,000
60%
250,000
50%
200,000
40%
150,000
30%
100,000
20%
50,000
10%
0
0%
1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
65+ Pop
65+ Pop as a % of Total Pop
Looking ahead
Measures of child well-being show troublesome trends
Child poverty in New Hampshire has been growing over the past decade, and at a rate faster than
the nation as a whole. According to data from the U.S. Census’s annual American Community
Survey, the New Hampshire child poverty rate in 2012 was 15.6 percent, up from 12 percent the
previous year. New Hampshire saw the largest single-year jump in child poverty of any state
(though the margin of error for New Hampshire was also among the largest, as the state has a
relatively small population, and is thus more subject to fluctuations in the survey data.)
This trend is troubling for obvious reasons. Research indicates that growing up in poverty can
impede a child’s cognitive development, and children from low-income households typically fare
worse on measures of academic success, such as test scores and high school graduation rates.
An aging population will reshape the state’s healthcare system
The aging of the population in New Hampshire will put pressure on virtually every dimension of
the state’s health care system. If we assume that the elderly population in New Hampshire
eligible for the state’s Medicaid program in 2020 will use services at the same rate as the elderly
do today, the number of individuals participating in the program will increase rapidly, increasing
slightly more than 30 percent over the next 10 years. These trends will put pressure on the state
to rethink how it finances long term care services, including institutional and home and
community-based services.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
5
New Hampshire’s housing stock is not well matched to future needs
In the decades before the Great Recession, New Hampshire’s housing market was a major driver
in the state’s expanding economy. But with recent shifts in the state’s demographic and
economic trends, New Hampshire’s current housing infrastructure could end up becoming a drag
on future economic growth and stability.
The reasons are multiple: an aging population, shifts in housing preferences among younger
generations, a misalignment between housing supply and future demand, and changes in
traditional financing paths for homeownership. In the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, housing demand
was driven by the Baby Boomers moving to New Hampshire. But as we have seen in many
policy areas, much of New Hampshire’s housing industry (builders, planners, public officials,
etc.) have yet to fully transition away from the mindset of the past, in which consistent rates of
high population growth was the norm. Instead, they need to prepare for a housing model defined
by less growth overall, more senior households, fewer young households, financially strained
first-time buyers, and changing lending standards.
Public policy initiatives can do more than respond to such demographic changes: They can help
shape them. Local zoning ordinances that seek to limit the number of new housing units, increase
mandatory lot sizes, or dictate the type of units that can be built, for example, may drive up the
cost of housing. Higher housing prices, in turn, can create difficulties for new arrivals and
current residents seeking affordable homes, which may deter young people and working families
from moving to the state.
Additional resources
Aging and the Healthcare System

“New Hampshire's Silver Tsunami: Aging and the Healthcare System,” NHCPPS, Sept.
2011.
http://www.nhpolicy.org/UploadedFiles/Reports/aging_and_the_healthcare_system_final.pdf

“Aging and the Public Long Term Care System,” NHCPPS, Sept. 2012.
http://www.nhpolicy.org/UploadedFiles/Reports/Aging_and_the_LTC_Systemv5test.pdf
Demographics and Housing

“Big Houses, Small Households” NHCPPS, March 2014.
http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/housing-in-nh-pt-1-big-houses-small-households

“Housing in New Hampshire: Senior Perspectives,” NHCPPS, March 2014.
http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/housing-in-nh-pt-2-senior-perspectives

“Housing in New Hampshire: The Evolving Environment,” NHCPPS, March 2014.
http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/housing-in-nh-pt-3-the-evolving-environment
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
6
New Hampshire’s Economy
The state’s economic model is changing significantly
By many measures, New Hampshire’s economy rests on strong foundations. With high levels of
educational attainment, a competitive tax structure, relatively low poverty rates, proximity to the
Greater Boston economic market, and an overall high quality of life, the state has many enviable
assets that boosted economy growth and prosperity over the past several decades.
But New Hampshire faces considerable disadvantages in other areas, especially when compared
to areas of the country that are seeing more robust economic growth. These challenges go
beyond the economic disruption caused by the Great
Recession. Recent developments such as declining
rates of in-migration and an aging workforce are
The years since 2010 are the
upending the model that defined the state’s economy
first period in more than 40
since the 1980s – consistent population growth,
years in which annual job
increased productivity, and a more resilient economy
than our competitors. The shift away from long-held
growth in New Hampshire
assumptions of consistent growth will reshape the
has lagged behind the
state’s policies on job creation, tax policy, land use,
national and regional rates.
social services, and other areas.
Job growth has slowed
New Hampshire’s job growth has declined considerably over the past decade. For instance, while
the number of jobs in the state increased annually on average by 4.1 percent during the 1970s,
the state actually saw small annual decreases in jobs from 2000 to 2010.
That decrease was less than for New England and the nation as a whole (0.4 percent and 0.2
percent, respectively, in average annual job loss.) However, over the past three years, New
Hampshire has been regaining lost jobs at a slower pace than both the New England region and
the nation. Since 2010, annual job growth has averaged just less 1 percent in New Hampshire,
compared to 1.7 percent nationally and 1.2 for all of New England.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
7
Average Annual Growth in Employment, 1970 to 2013
4.5%
4.1%
4.0%
3.5%
United States
New England
New Hampshire
3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
1.8%
2.0%
2.5%
2.4%
2.5%
2.0%
1.7%
1.5%
1.2%
1.3%
1.2%
0.9%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
-0.2%
-0.4%
-0.5%
-1.0%
1970 to 80
1980 to 90
1990 to 00
2000 to 10
2010 to 13
The period since 2010 is the first in more than 40 years in which annual job growth in New
Hampshire lagged behind the national and regional rates. The United States and New England
have recovered all of the jobs lost in the recession, while New Hampshire still lags in returning
to pre-recession job levels.
Most of the recent growth in employment, especially in the service sector, has been in industries
that do not require highly skilled workers. Accommodation and Food Services industries added
the most jobs from 2011 to 2012, and most of the positions in this industry require a high school
diploma or less for employment. Low skill industries tend to pay wages that are below average.
The quality of the jobs created has been mediocre, because two thirds of the jobs created pay
below average wages.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
8
Change in NH Jobs from 2011 to 2012 by Average Wage
4,500
4,117
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,451
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Above Average Wage
Below Average Wage
Economic growth is slackening
Tied closely to the decline in the rate of job creation is a slowing rate of growth in the overall
state economy. Between 2000 and 2010, New Hampshire saw a slower rate of growth in Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) than in any period in the past 40 years.
New Hampshire Real GDP Growth by Decade
75.2%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
54.4%
50.9%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
11.8%
10.0%
0.0%
1970 to 1980
1980 to 1990
1990 to 2000
2000 to 2010
This is due, in large part, to the impact of the Great Recession. But even as the recession slowed
economic growth across the country, many regions outperformed New Hampshire, seeing more
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
9
buoyant job growth, higher productivity gains, and higher growth in the capital stock in those
regions. New Hampshire also saw a greater drop-off in GDP growth between the 1990s and the
2000s than almost every region of the country.
Percent Change in Real GDP in BEA Regions
80.0%
70.0%
70.9%
57.8%
60.0% 50.9%
50.0%
11.8%
17.0%
1990 to 2000
2000 to 2010
26.5%
17.1%
16.6%
To
ta
l
US
So
ut
he
as
t
So
ut
hw
Ro
es
t
ck
y
M
ou
nt
ai
n
Fa
rW
es
t
ai
ns
G
re
at
La
ke
s
id
ea
st
M
En
gl
an
d
ps
hi
re
1.7%
Ne
w
Ha
m
16.5%
19.9%
42.4%
41.6%
31.2%
10.4%
10.0%
0.0%
Ne
w
48.0%
30.1%
Pl
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
41.9%
40.3%
36.2%
Government and healthcare are the state’s fastest growing sectors
The dominant industry in New Hampshire for many years has been the manufacturing sector. Of
particular importance for New Hampshire’s economic activity is the smart manufacturing/high
technology (SMHT) industry, which includes manufacturers engaged in the transformation of
materials into new products using advanced technology and skilled labor.
But while smart manufacturing remains the single
largest sector by this measure of economic activity
(18 percent of total compensation in 2013), both
public sector (i.e. government) employment and
health care have risen sharply over the past decade
as a percent of overall economic activity. These two
sectors are quickly approaching manufacturing as
the largest slice of the state’s economy.
Government and health care
are quickly approaching
manufacturing as the largest
slice of the state economy.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
10
New Hampshire Total Compensation Paid by Selected Industries
(Thousands of Dollars)
$7,000,000
Manufacturing + High Tech
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
Government
Healthcare
$4,000,000
Retail Trade
$3,000,000
Finance
$2,000,000
Construction
$1,000,000
12
20
20
08
20
06
20
04
20
02
20
00
20
98
19
96
19
94
19
92
19
19
90
$-
10
Education
Real Estate
The “creative economy” is a significant slice of NH’s economic output
The “creative economy” – which is generally defined as industries involved in the creation and
dissemination of knowledge and information – is considered an important force in driving
economic growth. The term can be used to cover industries as varied as architecture, design,
marketing, film, music and entertainment, publishing, digital industries, education and more.
Arts, entertainment, and recreation (including accommodation and food services) make up about
4 percent of New Hampshire’s economic activity.
We can measure more precisely the impact of creative occupations by noting those areas where
New Hampshire has a higher share of those occupations among its workforce than the national
average. The table below provides “location quotients,” which provide a way of quantifying how
concentrated an industry is in a region compared to the nation, revealing what makes a state
unique. For example, New Hampshire has a higher concentration of the super creative core –
those occupations most associated with the creative economy – than the national average, but
less than other New England states like Massachusetts. New Hampshire has a relatively higher
share of computer and mathematical occupations, architecture and engineering occupations,
education, training, and library occupations. Overall, New Hampshire has a higher proportion of
creative class occupations than in the United States.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
11
New Hampshire’s Creative Economy
Creative Class Occupational Categories
New Hampshire and the United States
Source: Occupational Employment Statistics, BLS, for May 2012
Super Creative Core
Computer and Mathematical Occupations
Architecture and Engineering Occupations
Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations
Education, Training, and Library Occupations
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media Occupations
Creative Professionals
Management Occupations
Business and Financial Operations Occupations
Legal Occupations
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations
High end sales and sales management
(41-1011, 41-1012, 41-3031, 41-4011, 41-4012)
Total "Creative Class"
Total All Occupations
NH
Loc Quot
1.04
1.04
1.06
0.74
1.12
0.78
1.03
1.11
0.94
0.71
0.98
1.22
1.03
1.00
ME
MA
VT
NC
CO
TX
VA
Loc Loc Loc Loc Loc Loc Loc
Quot Quot Quot Quot Quot Quot Quot
0.92 1.25 1.21 0.96 1.15 0.99 1.25
0.57 1.58 0.84 0.96 1.49 1.01 2.01
0.82 1.23 1.00 0.78 1.27 1.19 1.19
0.89 1.76 1.28 1.03 1.42 0.86 0.92
1.10 1.06 1.39 1.04 0.92 1.00 1.02
0.90 1.16 1.30 0.76 1.18 0.73 1.05
0.99 1.20 0.97 0.96 1.05 0.95 1.04
1.15 1.35 0.91 0.89 0.87 0.95 1.00
0.76 1.18 0.93 0.88 1.35 0.92 1.35
0.75 1.02 0.92 0.78 1.19 0.85 1.26
1.18 1.21 1.11 1.05 0.90 0.91 0.89
0.81 1.00 0.82 1.09 1.11 1.10 0.82
0.96
1.00
1.22
1.00
1.06
1.00
0.96
1.00
1.09
1.00
0.96
1.00
1.12
1.00
By contrast, agriculture and related industries that rely on natural resources make up a relatively
small part of the New Hampshire economy. New Hampshire ranks 44th among the states in the
portion of economic activity associated with agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting.
Attracting the “creative class”
With declining rates of in-migration, lower birth rates, and the resultant decline in young
residents, New Hampshire must grapple with the challenge of attracting and developing a skilled
workforce. The share of the state’s population between the ages of 35 and 44, arguably those in
their period of highest productivity, declined by slightly more than 4 percent between 2000 and
2010. Only two states saw a bigger decline over the same period.
This ongoing demographic shift must shape how policymakers think about coming workforce
needs. As shown below, the traditional workforce cohort (those aged 20 to 64 years) in New
Hampshire is projected to decline between 2010 and 2040. These same projections suggest a
doubling in the population over 65 over the same time span.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
12
Projections of a Declining Workforce
Growth by Age Cohort (2010 - 2040)
900,000
800,000
700,000
NH Workforce
Under 20
20 to 64
65 +
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
These trends raise important questions for New Hampshire. First, what are the factors that most
attract a workforce to New Hampshire, and what does that mean for public policy? In addition,
how can the state take advantage of the human capital associated with the aging of the Baby
Boomers and incorporate that in the state’s economic growth?
Looking ahead
New Hampshire faces challenges in developing a future workforce
While many of New Hampshire’s economic indicators reflect the decades-long period of growth
and prosperity that began in the 1970s, some measures of future prospects are less promising.
This can be seen in an analysis the Center developed to assist the Business and Industry
Association of New Hampshire in its development of a strategic economic plan for the state.
Each “indicator,” or measure of some aspect of the state’s economy, is placed into a broader
category: healthcare, education and workforce, energy, infrastructure, etc.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
13
NH Economic Dashboard 2013
Area
WFHousing
Regulatory
Cultural
EdWorkFrc
Cultural
EdWorkFrc
EdWorkFrc
EdWorkFrc
Fiscal
GrowthReten
Fiscal
Energy
Infrastructure
GrowthReten
Health
GrowthReten
GrowthReten
Cultural
GrowthReten
Cultural
Health
Regulatory
Cultural
Energy
Regulatory
Infrastructure
Infrastructure
Regulatory
GrowthReten
Fiscal
EdWorkFrc
GrowthReten
Energy
WFHousing
Health
WFHousing
Energy
Infrastructure
Health
Cultural
Fiscal
Infrastructure
WFHousing
Fiscal
Energy
GrowthReten
Regulatory
EdWorkFrc
Health
EdWorkFrc
Indicator
Homeownership rates
Pollution Abatement / $ Value Added
Percent of tree cover urban areas
High School grad rate
Voter turnout rate
Pct of pop in Science & Engineering workforce
Pct w/Associates+
Percent of children aged 3-4 in preschool
Public health/welfare spending per person in poverty
Manufacturing Supercluster LQ
State Business Tax Climate Index
Consumption per Capita, Million BTU
Transportation energy expenditures as percent of personal income
VC Investment Dollars Per Capita 2011
Percent Uninsured 2011
R&D performed per $GDP (%)
Business Churn
Domestic tourism spending per capita
Manufacturing Contribution to Total Compensation
Creative Economy Jobs Concentration
2011 Age Adjusted Mortality Rates
Index of State Liability Systems
Volunteering rate
State Energy Efficiency Rank
Percent of Mandated Health Benefits
Pct. of state w/access to broadband speeds of 3mbps for downloads, 768 kbps for uploads
Water infrastructure needs per capita
CEO grades for State Taxation and Regulation
% of Jobs in Firms with 20 to 99 Employees
Public govt & admin per $ Personal Income
Rate of HS grads going to degree-granting institution
Total Employment % Change 2007 to 2012
Expenditures per Capita, Dollars
Rent more than 30% of income
Total Health Care Expenditures as a Percent of Gross State Product (GSP), 2010
Ratio Median Housing Price to Median Income
Natural Gas Prices in Dollars per mmbtu
Portion of unacceptable rough roads
State-specific Standardized Infection Ratios (SIRs):
State spending on natural resources per capita
Top marginal corporate tax rate
Percent of bridges deficient or obsolete
Owner costs more than 30% of Income
State debt per $ Personal Income
Industrial Electric Prices
Capital Investment Projects per 100,000 pop
Land Use Restriction
Change in 35-44 y.o share of population, 2000 to 2010
Average Family Premium per Enrolled Employee For Employer-Based Health Insurance
Average student debt
NH Rank
2
3
3
4
4
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
8
8
9
10
12
13
13
14
15
16
19
19
20
20
21
22
23
24
24
25
26
28
32
34
34
35
36
37
38
39
43
45
46
46
47
48
49
50
Viewed this way, we can divide many of the indicators into two broad categories: those that
point to past or current conditions, and those that relate more to future growth. Many of the
indicators where New Hampshire fares well, including high education levels and a robust science
and engineering workforce, reflect past or current conditions.
On the other hand, the table shows that in more “future-oriented” measurements –the change in
the 35-to-44-year-old share of the population, average student debt, housing costs, and capital
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
14
investment –New Hampshire fares quite poorly. These measures are directly linked to a state’s
ability to attract and retain young people and arm them with the skills needed to compete for
good jobs in coming years.
Other areas in which the state ranks near the bottom of the country include many measures of
business costs: industrial electric prices, corporate tax rate, health care costs, and land use
restrictions. These, too, may constrain future economic growth, as other regions of the country
can offer low-cost alternatives to organizations seeking a favorable businesses climate.
Policymakers need to prioritize economic development investments
In the past, when considering economic development options, New Hampshire policymakers
have focused on those areas where the state ranks high in state-by-state surveys: the creation of a
low-tax environment, with a focus on high quality of life measures, such as a clean environment,
low poverty and low crime.
But in order to maintain a competitive advantage against other states, should policymakers here
redirect their focus on areas where New Hampshire has typically fallen short, including
healthcare and energy costs, infrastructure and public higher education spending?
Will investments in these or other areas yield better returns on economic growth? The answer,
for now, is unclear. But what is clear is that New Hampshire can no longer rely on the
demographic trends that have propelled it to economic prosperity over the past three decades.
Should the state focus on certain regions of the state? For example, a pro-growth model might
focus on the five communities with the highest level of economic productivity, which includes
Nashua, Manchester, Concord, Portsmouth, and Rochester. Together, these cities accounted for
more than 60 percent of the state’s wages in 2012.
There is no single, simple response to this new set of circumstances; policymakers will have to
weigh various options. These include investing in human capital (an area where we rank
relatively high, as measured by educational attainment), redesigning the state’s tax structure
(where New Hampshire enjoys one of the lowest per-capita tax collection rates in the country but
maintains high corporate taxes), or investing in improved infrastructure and transportation (an
area in which the state ranks relatively poorly). The likely return-on-investment of these and
other options should be part of that decision-making process, as well.
Additional resources



“From Tailwind to Headwind: New Hampshire’s Shifting Economic Trends,” NHCPPS,
Sept. 2012. http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/from-tailwind-to-headwind-newhampshireamp39s-shifting-economic-trends
“New Hampshire’s Economic Climate: Key Indicators,” NHCPPS, October 2013.
http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/new-hampshireamp39s-economic-climate-key-indicators
“New Hampshire’s Economy at a Glance,” Bureau of Labor Statistics.
http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.nh.htm
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
15
Education in New Hampshire
New Hampshire’s education system remains strong, though shifting
student demographics pose future challenges
For many years, New Hampshire has had among the highest-performing public education
systems in the country. On math and reading scores as reported by the National Assessment of
Educational Progress, high school graduation rates, and high school drop out rates, New
Hampshire ranks higher than the national figures and is among the top states in the country for
overall education quality.
However, as in every other state, New Hampshire sees gaps in
student performance based on socio-economic status and
race/ethnicity, with students from low-income households, black
students, and Hispanic students generally faring worse than the
statewide student population. There are also significant disparities
in student achievement from school district to school district.
Those disparities, too, often fall along socio-economic lines.
Demographic changes in the state are also fueling the policy
debate. Over the past decade, New Hampshire has seen a steady
decline in its school-age population and student enrollments. This
decline will likely prompt further discussions about education
spending – including spending on school infrastructure – staffing
levels, changes in curriculum, and regionalization of educational
services across communities.
As in every
other state, New
Hampshire sees
gaps in student
performance
based on
economic
status, race and
ethnicity.
Student outcomes are high, but disparities in achievement persist
New Hampshire has long enjoyed high rates of student success on a range of measures. But these
statewide figures mask disparities across school districts and student subgroups, including
racial/ethnic groups and those based on economic status, student disability and English-language
learner status.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
16
Proficiency in reading varies widely by student sub-group
Percent of students scoring proficient or higher
on state reading tests (2005-2013)
90%
85%
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
55%
All students
Asian
Black
Hispanic
Low-income
White
50%
45%
40%
2005
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Scores on the annual NECAP exams, the state’s standardized tests of student
achievement, vary greatly across districts. For instance, the percent of 3rd grade students
scoring “proficient” or higher for reading last year ranged from 50 percent in one district
to 100 percent for several others.
Standardized test scores in reading show great variation across districts
(each line represents a single school district).
3rd Grade reading scores, by district, 2013-2014
100
Percent of students scoring "proficient" or higher

2006
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
17
Graduation rates also vary considerably across the state. While the overall state graduation rate is
comparatively high, with the majority of New Hampshire high schools graduating between 77
percent and 95 percent of their students in 2011, a handful of schools show stubbornly low
graduation rates – with nearly one-third of students in some high schools failing to graduate on
time in 2011.
College enrollment rates among high school graduates in 2013 ranged from less than 50 percent
at some schools to 100 percent at one school.
Percent of high school graduates going on to post-secondary
education, by high school, (class of 2013)
100%
90%
Statewide rate
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Note: Each bar represents a high school in New Hampshire.
Education funding is largely a local affair
School district revenue is raised through a number of different sources. The major source of
district revenue is generated through property taxes.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
18
NH School District Revenue by Category, 2012-13
Statewide Property
Tax
13%
State Foundation/
Adequacy Aid
20%
Federal Aid
6%
Other State Aid
3%
Tuition, Food, and
Other
1%
Sale of Bonds &
Notes
0%
Local Property Tax
57%
Source: New Hampshire Department of Education.
State education aid (not counting the statewide property tax) represents roughly 23 percent of
total school district revenue. The share of state aid varies considerably from community to
community across New Hampshire. This revenue model reflects the growing efforts to “target”
state education aid to communities with less ability to generate school district revenue through
local taxation. However, the extent to which targeting is allowed to drive state education
spending remains a topic of considerable debate.
Compared to the rest of the nation, New Hampshire ranks in the bottom third in terms of state
contributions to education.

In 2011-12 (the most recent year for which comparable national data is available), the
state contributed 36 percent of total school district revenue (including the statewide
property tax), compared to the national average of 45.5 percent.
In terms of total spending, however, New Hampshire school districts spent more per pupil than
the national average. Though as a percent of the overall economy, New Hampshire’s education
spending has been below the national rate.

During the 2012-13 school year, New Hampshire school districts spent an average of
$13,593 per pupil, well above the national average of $10,608 per pupil.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
19
Per-pupil education spending by state, 2012-13
$25,000
$20,000
New Hampshire
$15,000
United States
$10,000
$5,000
$0
T
U
K
O
S
M
V
N
N
T
D
S
L
A
C
S
A
G
R
A
R
O
N
I
A
I
S
U
N
M
I
E
W N
V IL
W
E
M
H
N
E
D
A
M
T
V
J
N
C
D
Source: Annual Survey of School System Finances 2012
New Hampshire’s funding for higher education is the lowest in the country
The past decade has witnessed significant changes in state fiscal support for higher education,
much of it driven by financial pressures from the Great Recession. State funding for the
University System of New Hampshire (USNH) fell by nearly 50 percent in FY2012, but has been
rising steadily since then, though total state support remains below the pre-cut level. State
support for the Community College System of New Hampshire (CCSNH) was relatively smaller.
And while state support for public higher education remains comparatively low in New
Hampshire, tuition levels are among the highest in the country.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
20
State Support for Higher Education by System , FY2004-FY2015
$110,000,000
$100,000,000
$90,000,000
$80,000,000
$70,000,000
$60,000,000
USNH
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2005
2006
CCSNH
$50,000,000
$40,000,000
$30,000,000
$20,000,000
$10,000,000
$0
Source: Office of Legislative Budget Assistant.
For much of the past decade, New Hampshire has ranked 50th in national tables comparing state
fiscal support for higher education.
The U.S. average state support per $1,000 in personal income was nearly four times greater than
New Hampshire’s state support – $1.38 for New Hampshire, compared to a national rate of $5.42
per $1,000 in personal income.
State Support for Higher Education per $1,000 in Personal Income, FY2013
US Average
New Hampshire
NH
CO
MA
PA
VT
RI
AZ
OR
MO
NJ
FL
MI
WA
VA
OH
CT
NV
NY
ME
WI
SD
CA
MN
MD
MT
US
DE
SC
TN
TX
IA
IL
KS
IN
LA
OK
ID
GA
UT
KY
AL
NE
HI
WV
AR
MS
ND
AK
NM
NC
WY
$14
$13
$12
$11
$10
$9
$8
$7
$6
$5
$4
$3
$2
$1
$0
Source: NCHEMS Information Center (2003-2011) and Illinois State University, Grapevine Data (2012-2013).
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
21
In national tables comparing average in-state tuition at public four-year institutions, New
Hampshire also ranks at the bottom of the national list.
In 2012-13, New Hampshire public four-year institutions had the highest average in-state
tuition and fees in the country.
Tuition and fees averaged more than $14,500 per academic year.


Average In-State Tuition and Fees at Public Four-Year Institutions by State, 2012-2013
$16,000
$15,000
$14,000
New Hampshire
$13,000
$12,000
$11,000
$10,000
$9,000
$8,000
$7,000
$6,000
$5,000
$4,000
$3,000
$2,000
$0
WY
UT
NM
LA
AK
WV
ID
MT
MS
NC
FL
OK
NV
NY
AR
ND
SD
NE
KS
GA
TN
IA
MO
MD
OR
TX
CO
KY
HI
WI
IN
AL
OH
CA
ME
CT
AZ
VA
MN
MA
SC
WA
RI
DE
MI
IL
PA
NJ
VT
NH
$1,000
Source: The College Board, Trends in College Pricing 2012, Figure 7.
Student debt continues to climb
Mounting student debt has become a critical policy issue on both the national and the state level.
The total amount of student debt held by U.S. graduates is more than $1 trillion – with almost 40
million Americans carrying student debt.1
According to current estimates, the average New Hampshire college student graduates with more
than $32,000 in student loan debt – the highest in the nation.2 If the cost of higher education
continues to climb and loans remain one of the primary sources of self-funding, student debt will
likely continue to climb.
Source: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, “Student Loan Affordability: Analysis of Public Input on Impact
and Solutions”, May 8, 2013.
2
Source: Institute for College Access & Success, The Project on Student Debt: http://projectonstudentdebt.org. The
Project on Student Debt collects data from both private and public colleges and does not distinguish between
resident and non-resident students.
1
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
22
Average student debt increasing at all USNH institutions 3
Average Undergraduate Debt Load for In-State Students by Institution, 2007-2012
$35,000
UNH
$30,000
KSC
PSU
$25,000
$20,000
$15,000
$10,000
$5,000
$0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Source: UNH, Keene, and Plymouth Office of Institutional Research.
Looking ahead
New Hampshire should expect continued declines in student population
Over the past decade, New Hampshire has seen several changes in its student population.



Total public school enrollment has decreased in recent years.
The number of students in charter schools or educated at home has increased.4
The student body has grown more racially and ethnically diverse in recent years, while
measures of economic hardship have also risen.
These trends will help shape future education policy discussions at the state and local level,
including conversations about staffing levels, funding formulas, investment in school facilities,
curriculum offerings, and the achievement gap.
Data may not include all private loans that students or their parents take out. Only includes loan information
received or reported to the institution.
4
New Hampshire legalized the operation of charter schools, which are funded by tax dollars but have more leeway
in administration and curricula than traditional schools, beginning with the 2004-05 school year.
3
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
23
NH public school enrollments (2002-03 to 2013-14)
225,000
9,757
200,000
9,989 10,116 10,360
10,375 10,489
10,968 11,969
11,922 11,904
11,888 11,602
175,000
90,772 89,077 87,034 85,788 84,636
83,234 82,313
81,086 80,200
79,528 78,065
77,397
150,000
125,000
Kindergarten
Elementary
Middle School
High school
100,000
42,077 41,672 40,514 39,747 38,646 38,022 36,880 36,726 35,923
34,714 34,696 34,187
75,000
50,000
63,142
25,000
64,458
66,828
67,347
67,384
66,413
64,961
64,392
62,882
61,494
60,114
58,733


-1
4
13
-1
3
20
12
-1
2
20
11
-1
1
20
20
10
-1
0
20
09
-0
9
20
08
-0
8
20
07
-0
7
20
06
-0
6
05
-0
5
20
04
-0
4
20
03
20
20
02
-0
3
0
In 2002-03, total public school enrollment peaked at about 207,000 students
By the 2013-14 school year, total public school enrollment had decreased to 185,320 – a
decline of 11 percent from the 2002-03 high.
This decline raises questions for school districts about the possible need to consolidate functions
across schools, including the combining of school districts and SAUs.
The Common Core will bring big changes in curriculum and assessments
The 2014-15 academic year marks the first year of full implementation of the Common Core
State Standards (CCSS) in New Hampshire schools. These standards (often referred to simply as
the “Common Core”) are a set of expectations about what students should know and be able to
demonstrate at each grade level. The standards set goals for student learning and benchmarks
against which to measure that learning.
The CCSS were developed by education leaders across the country to provide a uniform set of
standards from state to state. The goal is to have the same set of expectations for students, no
matter where they go to school. The CCSS emphasize “higher-order” skills, such as critical
thinking and problem-solving, that are supposed to better equip students for success in higher
education and the workplace.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
24
The CCSS focus on two areas: mathematics and language arts. While New Hampshire has
adopted its own state standards for other subject areas, those for math and language arts mirror
those of the CCSS.
Among the changes ushered in by the Common Core is a new set of standardized tests. New
Hampshire is one of 24 states administering the SMARTER Balanced exams as part of the
Common Core implementation. These new standardized tests, which replace the NECAP exams
that have been in place since 2005, will first be administered to New Hampshire students in
spring 2015. Students will take these new exams online, with computers, and, because of quicker
result turnaround times, are designed to provide more useful information to teachers to tailor
instruction to meet the needs of each student. Ensuring that new curricula and teaching methods
align with these new exams will be among the challenges facing educators in the 2014-15 school
year.
How can public education help address the needs of the future economy?
New Hampshire has a higher share of its population employed in science and engineering fields
than much of the rest of the country (3.9 percent compared to 2.5 percent nationwide), ranking
the fifth-highest state in the country (and behind the District of Columbia.)
NH has one of the highest shares of science and engineering workers it its populations.
Percent of population employed in science & engineering fields, 2010
6.00%
5.00%
New Hampshire
4.00%
U.S.
3.00%
2.00%
0.00%
Mississippi
Arkansas
Nevada
Kentucky
Louisiana
West Virginia
Oklahoma
Wyoming
Florida
Tennessee
South Carolina
Alabama
Montana
South Dakota
Indiana
North Dakota
New York
Hawaii
Missouri
Georgia
Ohio
Maine
Iowa
North Carolina
Nebraska
Arizona
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Kansas
Michigan
Texas
United States
Idaho
Wisconsin
New Mexico
Alaska
Oregon
Delaware
Vermont
Rhode Island
Utah
California
Connecticut
New Jersey
Minnesota
Washington
New Hampshire
Colorado
Massachusetts
Virginia
Maryland
District of
1.00%
Source: Population Reference Bureau, Trends in Science and Engineering Labor Force Project
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
25
But our science and engineering labor force is also older, on average, than the rest of the country.
Among that sector of the labor force, 21.8 percent of workers are over the age of 55, compared to
18.1 percent nationally. This raises questions about the state’s ability to replace that older cohort
of science and engineering field workers as they retire over the coming decade.
Additional Resources


“Public Colleges, Public Dollars: Higher Education in New Hampshire” NHCPPS, March
2014. http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/public-colleges-public-dollars-higher-educationin-nh
“Student-Centered Learning in New Hampshire: An Overview and Analysis” NHCPPS,
February 2013. http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/student-centered-learning-in-nh-anoverview-and-analysis
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
26
Health care in New Hampshire
New Hampshire’s health care system is in the midst of great change
New Hampshire’s health care policy landscape faces great change – and great uncertainty – as
the state grapples with several intertwining trends in health care financing, demographic change
and national policy. The most critical issues in health care in New Hampshire today include:




The implementation of the sweeping federal health care reform effort known as the
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) is transforming many elements of
New Hampshire’s health care system.
Efforts to control the cost of health care have largely been unsuccessful, as the share of
health care spending as a portion of the overall economy has far exceeded growth in
inflation, guaranteeing that health care costs will remain an important topic. However, the
market is rapidly transforming, as organizations begin to collaborate at new levels.
New Hampshire’s aging population is increasing pressure on policymakers to consider
reforms to the health delivery and financing system.
Recent state reforms, including changes to the state’s disproportionate share program,
assessments of the state’s certificate of need process, and implementation of Medicaid
managed care program, have introduced a new level of uncertainty into the health care
marketplace.
The following questions are likely to dominate the policy debate in the immediate future:



Has the implementation of the Affordable Care Act helped reduce the number of
uninsured residents?
Have incentives designed to encourage the development of accountable care
organizations resulted in lower costs?
Have the enormous changes the health care marketplace had a positive or negative impact
on the well-being of New Hampshire residents?
Health care reform is reshaping New Hampshire’s health care marketplace
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, enacted in March 2010, set forth two ambitious
goals for the nation’s health system: extend health coverage to the uninsured, and slow the
growth in health care costs. The Act is being phased in gradually over several years, but the
legislation promises to fundamentally change health care delivery in New Hampshire. 5
The major components of the Act are:
 the enactment of a number of health insurance reforms;
 providing insurance premium subsidies for some individuals not eligible for Medicaid
with incomes between 138 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level;
 providing the states with an option to expand the state’s Medicaid program to adults with
incomes less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level;
 requiring that all individuals secure health insurance or else pay a fine.
5
A full implementation timeline can be found here: http://kff.org/interactive/implementation-timeline/
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
27
The Act mandates a series of structural changes in the market as well – including the
development of health insurance exchanges and the introduction of pilot programs encouraging
the development of integrated health systems called Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) to
improve the cost-effectiveness of care through the Medicare program.
Some of the major components of the Act have already
been implemented. As of September 2010, health
insurance plans in New Hampshire are now required to
provide dependent coverage for anyone under age 26.
Insurance companies are now also required to insure
children younger than 19 who have pre-existing
conditions. In 2014, the state created the Health
Protection Plan, which expands the state’s Medicaid
program through a series of public, and eventually all
private, insurance options.6
An anticipated
increase in coverage
– as many as 100,000
New Hampshire
residents – has
already transformed
the state’s health
insurance market.
With the introduction of federal insurance subsidies for
people with incomes above 138 percent of the federal
poverty level, and the expansion of Medicaid for those
with incomes below 138 percent of the federal poverty
level, it is anticipated that a significant number of individuals will have coverage who did not
have any in the past. An anticipated increase in coverage – as many as 100,000 New Hampshire
residents – has already transformed the New Hampshire health insurance market, with two new
insurance providers starting to offer insurance in New Hampshire in 2015.
One of the goals of the ACA was to decrease the number of people lacking health insurance. At
the end of the first enrollment period, 40,000 people in New Hampshire had sought coverage
through the federal health insurance exchange. That number represents roughly 1 in 4 uninsured
people in the state. Compared to the rest of the country, that ranks New Hampshire sixth best
(out of the 50 states) in decreasing the number of uninsured residents.
We’ll have to wait to find out what this means for the health insurance market, as we don’t know
what share of those new enrollees have dropped employer-sponsored or Medicaid coverage for
the new exchange coverage. But, clearly, a significant share of New Hampshire residents has
expressed interest in the exchange product, at least based on sign-up data.
6
For a description of the program see: http://www.dhhs.state.nh.us/ombp/nhhpp/index.htm
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
28
Magnitude of Enrollment Impacts in US
Marketplace Enrollees as a % of Uninsured
as of 4/19/2014
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
25.4%
20.0%
10.0%
Vermont
Maine
Idaho
Connecticut
Florida
New Hampshire
Wisconsin
Michigan
Rhode Island
North Carolina
Pennsylvania
District of Columbia
Virginia
Utah
Montana
California
Nebraska
Missouri
Tennessee
Washington
Georgia
Colorado
New York
Indiana
Kansas
South Carolina
Delaware
North Dakota
Alabama
Mississippi
Massachusetts
New Jersey
Kentucky
Wyoming
Illinois
Oregon
Texas
South Dakota
Louisiana
Oklahoma
Ohio
Arizona
Minnesota
Alaska
Iowa
Maryland
Arkansas
Hawaii
New Mexico
West Virginia
Nevada
0.0%
Insurance coverage appears to be increasing in other ways as well. Total Medicaid coverage in
New Hampshire was up 6.8 percent, or roughly 9,000 individuals through April 2014 over the
past year. That’s 138,157 people on Medicaid in April 2014 compared to 129,346 people one
year earlier.
Among the many possible explanations for this growth, the one that seems most likely is that
people seeking insurance coverage to meet the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate found
that they were eligible for Medicaid. The health policy field calls this the “woodwork effect,”
implying that new enrollees are coming “out of the woodwork” to take part in a new program.
The strength of the economy (as measured by the employment rate, which tracks relatively well
with Medicaid enrollment) is slowly improving, so broader economic malaise is unlikely to be
much of a factor in this growth. Moreover, many other social service caseloads which move with
the economy are seeing flat or declining enrollment numbers.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
29
PERSONS
Apr-14
Total Medicaid
Food Stamp
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families
Nutritional Supplement for Working Families
Interim Disabled Parent
Aid to the Permanently and Totally Disabled
Old Age Assistance
Foster Care
Aid to the Needy Blind
Unduplicated Total Receiving Assistance
138,157
112,144
6,316
6,577
961
7,727
1,642
361
152
160,682
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)
Year to Year
Change
% Change
Apr-13
129,346
117,147
7,246
6,294
1,091
8,011
1,569
405
157
154,159
8,811
(5,003)
(930)
283
(130)
(284)
73
(44)
(5)
6,523
6.8%
-4.3%
-12.8%
4.5%
-11.9%
-3.5%
4.7%
-10.9%
-3.2%
4.2%
Source: NH Department of Health and Human Services Caseload Report.
The New Hampshire Health Protection Act – which expands Medicaid to childless adults up to
138 percent of the federal poverty level – cannot explain this growth as it didn’t take effect until
after the initial enrollments in the marketplace.
Health care spending is growing faster than the rest of the state economy
Growth in health care spending in New Hampshire is outpacing growth in other consumer
expenses, including energy costs and taxation levels.
Share of New Hampshire GDP
Energy, Healthcare and the State Budget
18%
16%
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
Energy
10
08
20
06
20
04
20
02
20
00
20
98
20
96
19
94
19
92
19
90
19
88
19
86
19
84
Healthcare
19
82
19
80
19
78
19
76
19
74
19
72
19
70
0%
19

Since 1970, locally raised taxes (slightly more than 2 percent of gross domestic product)
and energy spending (now approximately 9 percent of gross domestic product) have
remained relatively constant as a share of personal income.
Health care, on the other hand, has taken up an increasing share of personal income – up
from 8 percent of gross domestic product in 1970 to approximately 17 percent today.
19

GF +ETF Revenue as % of GSP
Source: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and U.S. Department of Energy
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
30
New Hampshire’s premiums are higher than much of the rest of the country



In 2013, the average annual premium for single person coverage in New Hampshire
(including the portion paid by the employer) was $6,249 – 12.1 percent higher than the
national average.
The average premium for family coverage in New Hampshire was $17,024 – 6.2 percent
above the national average.
The average premium for two-person coverage in New Hampshire was $12,651 – 15.1
percent above the national average.
For both single coverage and family coverage paid by the employee, the average annual rate of
increase in premiums in New Hampshire between 2000 and 2013 was about 9 percent, well
above the rate of inflation in the same period.
Annual Growth in Health Insurance Premiums
Average Annual Employee Contribution to Health Insurance
New Hampshire
United States
Annual
Annual
2000
2013 increase
2000
2013 increase
Single coverage
$470
$1,415
8.85%
$450
$1,170
7.63%
Family coverage
$1,752
$4,592
7.69%
$1,614
$4,421
8.06%
2-person coverage
n/a
$3,177
n/a
$2,940
-
Rising health insurance costs mean that health insurance consumes a larger portion of the family
budget. Since 2000, health insurance premiums as a share of family income have grown from 10
percent to approximately 17 percent. And the role of health care spending in the overall economy
has grown at a similar pace. Moreover, New Hampshire businesses perennially identify health
care as one of the most important policy questions.
Average Family Health Insurance Premium
as % of Mean Family Income in New Hampshire
20%
18.2%
18%
16%
16.9%
14%
17.4%
15.4%
14.0%
12%
10%
8%
10.2%
6%
4%
2%
0%
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Year
Source: The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) and American Community Survey (ACS)
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
31
An aging population is putting pressure on the health care system
Among the impacts of an aging population will be a change in the demand for health care
services, as older residents tend to spend a significantly higher share of their income on health
care goods. This change in demand will vary considerably across sectors of the health care
system, with Medicaid, Medicare, and private pay insurance companies experiencing the impact
of an aging population in different ways. In addition, impact will vary considerably across the
state, as certain regions of New Hampshire age quicker than others. Some will see an increase in
the elderly population because of in-migration, while others will age in place, with current
residents growing older.
With the aging of the population, some number of people will shift private market
insurance to Medicare. This will put pressure on the health system to provide more with less.
The reason: Medicare reimbursement rates are lower than average patient expenses, which
means health care providers will receive less money for providing services. Medicare’s
increasing market share will likely lead to future reimbursement reductions.
Medicaid will increasingly become an insurer of the elderly. Currently, Medicaid provides
health insurance for a wide range of individuals, including the poor, those with disabilities, and
the elderly. That balance will shift considerably towards the over-65 population in coming years.
While roughly 25 percent of total direct medical expenditures made by Medicaid today are
accounted for by those over the age of 65. By 2020, that number will rise to more than 50
percent.
These trends will put pressure on the state to reevaluate the existing moratorium on the
construction of nursing homes, as well as budgetary limits on home-and-community-based care
services. Planning for these changes has hardly begun.
Pressure on private insurance premiums will grow. As noted earlier, health care premiums
have been growing quickly in New Hampshire. An aging population will accelerate that growth
for two reasons. First, older individuals use more – and more expensive – health care. Second, as
the market share of Medicare increases, hospitals and other providers will try to shift the cost of
losses associated with Medicare to the private premium.
State action
Health care policy remains front and center on the state legislative agenda. State policymakers
began the process of developing a managed care system for its Medicaid program in 2011, which
affected 130,000 people who receive health care coverage through Medicaid. The state has also
taken great lengths to find ways to control the rapid growth in health care costs. Efforts included
a legislative review and assessment of the state’s certificate of need process which controls the
development of capital projects and a review of the rate-setting process.
But the single largest policy concern was the state’s $200 million Hospital Disproportionate
Share program, which accounts for between 3 percent and 5 percent of the state budget. This
program, which served to provide additional funds to the state and to specific hospitals, was
fundamentally changed in the 2012-2013 budget. These changes will likely continue to create
uncertainty around state revenue collections and the budget-writing process.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
32
Medicaid Hospital Disproportionate Share payment changes
After years of litigation, and months of negotiations among policy makers, the fate of the
Medicaid Hospital Disproportionate Share program has, at least temporarily, been resolved. The
DSH program – which has brought in billions of dollars into New Hampshire since the 1990s –
was overhauled in the writing of the 2012-13 state budget. The result was that the Medicaid
Enhancement Tax levied on hospitals remained the same as in prior budget biennium, but only
26 cents of every dollar was returned to hospitals. The remaining money was used to pay for a
variety of Medicaid services or used to offset General Fund expenses.
This change created significant losers (hospitals that paid more in taxes than they received in
DSH payments) and resulted in litigation. Rural hospitals – federally designated as critical access
hospitals – were largely protected from the changes. The litigants argued that the Medicaid
Enhancement Tax was unconstitutional. A court finding that the Medicaid Enhancement Tax was
unconstitutional put at risk both existing payments made to hospitals and approximately $90
million in funds currently being used to fund existing state services. The potential loss of these
dollars resulted in a long period of negotiations between New Hampshire hospitals and the
legislature and executive branch. In the resulting settlement, 25 of the state’s 26 hospitals agreed
to drop the lawsuit in exchange for additional resources being directed to hospitals.
Additional Resources



“Getting What We Pay For? Healthcare Spending in New Hampshire,” NHCPPS,
January 2013. http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/getting-what-we-pay-for-healthcarespending-in-nh
“Health and Equity in New Hampshire,” NHCPPS, February 2013.
http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/health-and-equity-in-new-hampshire-2013-report-card
“New Hampshire’s Silver Tsunami: Aging and the Healthcare System,” NHCPPS,
September 2011. http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/nhamp39s-silver-tsunami-aging-andthe-healthcare-system
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
33
New Hampshire’s State Budget
Every two years, the New Hampshire Legislature draws up a budget to fund state activities. This
spending plan covers a wide range of services, including public education, highway
maintenance, prisons, environmental protection, health care for tens of thousands of people, and
many more. Behind the dollar amounts in the budget document are thousands of policy
decisions: which programs to fund, where to invest resources or scale back investments. Thus, in
a sense, analyzing the state budget is one of the best ways to understand the state’s public policy
priorities.
Social services spending is the biggest driver of growth in the state budget
By dividing spending into the major categories (as defined by state budget writers), we get a bigpicture view of how New Hampshire spends public dollars.
State spending by category, 2014-15 (all fund sources)
Education
26%
Justice & Public
Protection
11%
Transportation
10%
Health & Social
Services
39%
General Government
9%
Resource Protection
& Development
5%
The diagram makes clear that most state spending is in the role of provider of social services to
the public. We also see the large role that education plays in the expenditure of public dollars;
this covers both the K-12 system, as well as the university and community college systems.
By analyzing this division of state spending across categories of government over a longer time
span, we can see broader trends and patterns in the way spending has changed7. For instance,
The figure below shows the distribution of state spending along the same broad categories of
A completely apples-to-apples comparison of 1982 to 2012 is difficult because programs and responsibilities shift
between the major functions of state government. The classifications of funds often change over time as well,
making a true apples-to-apples comparison difficult. But in general, the data provide a broad picture of shifts in
state spending by major function over this span and illustrate the larger role that health and other social programs
play in New Hampshire’s budget compared to 30 years ago.
7
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
34
government in 1982, more than 30 years ago.8 While direct comparisons of spending are
difficult, you can see that spending on Health & Social Services, Education, and Justice and
Public Protection have grown as a share of total state spending, while Transportation saw the
biggest decline, falling from 19 percent of total state spending in 1982 to 10 percent in the
current budget. Spending on Health and Human Services, by contrast, grew from 31 percent to
39 percent of total state spending since 1982.
State spending 30 years ago was more heavily weighted toward
Transportation and General Government than today
State spending by category, 1982 (all fund sources)
Education
24%
Justice & Public
Protection
8%
Transportation
19%
Health and Social
Services
31%
General
Government
15%
Resource
Protection &
Development
3%
We can also examine this shift by calculating the annualized growth in spending by category
over this time period. The table shows both General and Total Fund appropriations by these
major functions of state government, along with calculated annualized rate of changes in each.
(Total Fund amounts include federal funds, as well as specialized fund sources, such as revenue
from state liquor sales, lottery sales, Fish and Game revenues, and other sources.)
Both Total Fund and General Fund appropriations grew the most quickly in Health and Social
Services and Justice and Public Protection. In aggregate, the single largest source of growth in
General Fund appropriations was Health and Social Services. Both of these growth rates
exceeded population growth (1.2 percent annualized) and inflation (2.9 percent based on the
Consumer Price Index) over this period.
Data for 1982 comes from ‘1982 Operating Budget N.H. Laws of 1981, Chapter 568’. Director of Legislative
Services, Concord, NH, 1981. Data for 2014 comes from HB1 for 2014-2015 as published by the Legislative Budget
Office. http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2013/HB0001.pdf
8
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
35
Spending growth since 1982 has been highest
in the areas of Justice/Public Protection and Health/Social Services
General Government
Justice/Public Protection
Resource Prot. & Devel.
Transportation
Health & Social Services
Education
Fiscal Year 1982
General Funds
Total Funds
$ 80,756,983
$ 115,906,615
$ 29,827,378
$ 60,692,695
$ 17,377,974
$ 25,562,267
$
868,681
$ 152,238,886
$ 106,655,146
$ 245,740,743
$ 58,827,449
$ 191,335,075
Fiscal Year 2014
General Funds
Total Funds
$ 254,615,289 $ 482,623,456
$ 218,911,208 $ 580,672,724
$
33,805,402 $ 269,117,404
$
914,354 $ 539,778,012
$ 677,927,603 $ 2,109,285,560
$ 203,724,681 $ 1,409,270,702
Total
$ 294,313,611
$ 1,389,898,537
$ 791,476,281
$ 5,390,747,858
Annualized Change
General
Total
3.7%
4.6%
6.4%
7.3%
2.1%
7.6%
0.2%
4.0%
5.9%
6.9%
4.0%
6.4%
5.0%
Identifying the impact of different factors behind this growth in health-related spending is
difficult, especially over such a long time span. However, the growth appears to be driven
primarily by increases in the number of people covered by state health services, rather than by
expenditures per individual.
The Recession saw a major shift from past budgeting trends
Like all New Hampshire budgets, the FY2014-15 budget relies on a blend of revenue sources to
pay for state spending, many of which (including the Fish and Game Fund, the Highway Fund,
and the Turnpike Fund) can only be used for specific spending purposes. The largest slice,
labeled “General & Education Funds,” represents most of what we mean when we think of
monies raised by state taxes and fees.
New Hampshire's budget is funded by a variety of revenue sources
Total Appropriations by Fund Source, FY2014-15
Sweepstakes Fund- Fish and Game
Lottery
Fund
0.1%
0.3%
Liquor Commission
0.9%
General & Education
Funds
43.7%
Turnpike Fund
2.1%
Highway Fund
5.1%
Other Funds
16.6%
Federal Funds
31.1%
The state’s General Fund is the pool of money most directly within the control of lawmakers,
and it is what legislators, the media, and others usually mean when they refer to “the state
budget.” The General Fund pays for at least half of state services, other than highways and aid to
6.2%
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
36
schools. A closer analysis of this fund can tell us much about recent trends in New Hampshire
state budgeting.
In many ways, the past five years (starting with the Great Recession in 2008) represent a sharp
deviation from New Hampshire’s budgeting pattern of the recent decades. By 2010, spending
from state revenue sources (General Funds) was at the same level as in 2005. Further reductions
in the 2012-13 budget reduced the level of state spending even more. Such reductions in
spending mark a significant shift from the decades-long practice of annual increases in state
spending.
General Fund Expenditures (Millions $), FY1990-2015
(Figures for FY2014-15 are appropriated budget amounts)
$1,600
$1,400
$1,200
$1,000
$800
$600
$400
$200
$0
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
The cuts in this period were made in response to a sharp drop in state revenue collections, caused
mostly by the Great Recession. How sharp a drop? If the historic trend in revenue growth had
continued through the years of the recession, New Hampshire would have about 18 percent more
revenue during 2012 than it actually did – nearly $400 million more in real dollars.
The FY2014-15 budget was the first since before the recession in which spending levels were
higher than in the previous two-year period – though General Fund spending is still below
FY2008. In other words, state government is still grappling with the economic impacts of the
recession.
New Hampshire’s revenue model is unique among the states
The large number of relatively small contributors to total General Fund revenue, with eight
individual tax sources each contributing less than 5 percent to the fund, is rather unique to New
Hampshire. In many states, the two largest revenue sources (most often a sales tax and an income
tax) make up 75 percent to 80 percent of the total.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
37
FY2013 General Fund Revenue Sources
Business Profits Tax
18.9%
Court Fines & Fees
Beer Tax
0.9%
0.9%
Utilities Tax
0.4%
Meals and Rooms Tax
16.9%
Tobacco Settlement
1.6%
Board and Care
Revenue
1.9%
Securities Revenue
2.7%
Communications Tax
4.0%
Real Estate Transfer
Tax
4.4%
Liquor Sales
9.3%
Tobacco Tax
8.7%
Other Revenues
5.2%
"Medicaid
Enhancement"
Revenue
5.4%
Insurance Tax
6.7%
Business Enterprise
Tax
5.5%
Interest & Dividends
Tax
6.5%
The largest contributors to New Hampshire’s General Fund are:



Business profits tax (18.9 percent)
Meals and rooms taxes (16.9 percent)
Profits from state liquor sales (9.3 percent)
When we take a long-term view of changes in the General Fund relative to overall economic
growth in New Hampshire, we see a multi-year decline over the course of the Recession in the
portion of the state’s economy that is tapped as revenue for public spending through the General
Fund – from nearly 2.5 percent in 2008 to slightly less than 2 percent in 2013.
State taxes as a percent of the overall state economy have declined since the 1980s
General Fund Revenue as a Percent of Gross State Product
4.00%
3.50%
3.00%
2.50%
2.00%
1.50%
1.00%
0.50%
12
20
10
20
08
20
06
20
04
20
02
20
00
20
98
19
96
19
94
19
92
19
90
19
19
88
0.00%
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
38
The search for new revenue sources is a constant pressure
Over the last two and a half decades, New Hampshire has relied on fresh sources of revenue to
meet growing state budget expenditures. The state General Fund collected just under $600
million in 1988. If taxes and rates that year had remained unchanged, those same sources would
have generated $995 million in the year 2013.
However, in reality, General Fund revenues were $1.4 billion in 2013. The more than $400
million difference ($1.4 billion minus $995 million) came from new taxes (like the Business
Enterprise Tax), increases in tax rates for existing taxes (including increases in the meals and
rooms tax and tobacco tax), and non-tax sources such as the tobacco settlement and the Medicaid
Enhancement Tax. Almost one third of new revenue growth between 1998 and 2013 came from
new taxes, increased tax rates, and/or non-tax sources.
General Fund Revenues by Major Component
NH General Fund Revenues 1988 to 2013
(Current $)
$1,600
$1,414m
$1,353
$1,400
Millions of Dollars
$1,200
$1,000
Increased rates
Medicaid Enhancement
$995m
New taxes
$800
$600
Taxes and rates
in place in 1988
$400
$200
20
12
20
10
20
08
20
06
20
04
20
02
20
00
19
98
19
96
19
94
19
92
19
90
19
88
$0
State Fiscal Year
Looking ahead
Balancing a budget is relatively straightforward at the state level, as state spending is required to
equal revenues. The challenges (and, occasionally, opportunities) come when there is an
imbalance – that is, when revenues grow more slowly than spending, or vice versa.
Revenue growth still lags well behind pre-Recession rates
The table below shows growth in revenues, pre- and post-recession. Budgeted revenues grew at
3.6 percent in the five years preceding the recession. Budgeted revenues were anticipated to
grow only slightly (at 0.54 percent annual rate of increase) in the six years since the beginning of
the recession. Actual revenues have proved to be slightly higher than the budgeted rates over the
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
39
time period, but growth remains low relative to historic levels. Between 2012 and 2013, for
example, revenues grew at less than 2 percent, year over year.
The Recession Slowed Growth in Revenues
Growth in Revenues by Fund Source Pre and Post Recession
Annualized
Change PrePre-Recession
Recession
Recession
(2004-2009)
(2009 - 2015)
(2004-2009)
General Fund (Incl Liquor Funds)
$359,079,372 ($161,711,954)
5.12%
Federal Funds
$160,783,440
$155,422,067
2.28%
Other Funds
$256,777,938
$147,808,838
3.29%
Highway Funds
$52,359,825
($11,029,349)
4.12%
Fish and Game Funds
$2,258,676
$1,399,855
4.04%
Sweeps, Racing, and Char Gaming
$786,685
$641,143
1.89%
Turnpikes
$17,093,210
$38,287,147
5.03%
Total
$849,139,146
$170,817,747
3.60%
Annualized
Change
Recession
(2009 - 2015)
-1.73%
1.65%
1.39%
-0.65%
1.78%
1.18%
6.84%
0.54%
Source: HB1 from 2004 through 2015
Note: In this analysis, Liquor funds are included as general funds
Demand for state services continues to rise
Aside from the challenges on the revenue side, the state continues to see increases in demand for
state services. The table below shows state spending by major state function over the past 10
years, from 2005 through 2015. Relative to historic growth rates of 5 percent to 6 percent, total
appropriations grew at a relatively low 2 percent per year on an annualized basis over this time
period.
Change in Total Fund Appropriations (2005-2015)
Total Funds
Education
Health and Human Services
Admin of Justice and Public Prtn
General Government
Resource Protection and Development
Transportation
2005
$1,263,799,124
$1,751,650,584
$371,726,692
$326,051,415
$220,626,533
$512,180,390
2015
$1,431,345,606
$2,070,088,151
$589,415,730
$496,813,557
$270,638,138
$548,529,445
Change 20052015
1.25%
1.68%
4.72%
4.30%
2.06%
0.69%
Total Appropriations
$4,446,034,738
$5,406,830,627
1.98%
Aggregate budget amounts, however, may not be the best measure of the demand for state
services, as population increases and inflation create an upward pressure on expenditures even
with no expansion in services. To account for this, the following figure shows annual percent
change in per capita, inflation adjusted spending by major area of state government. In total, per
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
40
capita inflation adjusted spending fell slightly (by .04 percent per year). Measured this way,
expenditures fell for all major areas of government services with the exception of general
government expenditures and the administration of justice and public protection.
10 Year Compound Annual Change
2005-2015
3.0%
2.3%
2.5%
1.9%
2.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
Education
-0.5%
-1.0%
-1.1%
Health and
Human
Services
-0.6%
Admin of
Justice and
Public Prtn
General
Government
Resource
Transportation
Protection and
Development
-0.3%
-1.5%
-1.6%
-2.0%
Future spending demands add uncertainty to budgeting forecast
New Hampshire’s overall financial position suffered during the recession, though it has
recovered somewhat in recent years. As measured by net assets at the end of the fiscal year, the
state’s financial position peaked in 2007, before seeing declines through 2011. Since then, as
shown below, the state’s financial position has recovered, in part due to lower spending levels
and an improving revenue picture. But the long term question of the state’s financial position
will remain a function of future economic recovery and spending decisions.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
41
Net Position
Net Assets at Fiscal Year End
$3,500,000
$3,000,000
in 1,000 of $
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
In the short term, New Hampshire faces a series of
financial questions that are likely outside the
Legislature’s control, but will – in the absence of strong
growth in revenues – require additional tax changes or
spending cuts. First and foremost is the question of the
state’s Medicaid Enhancement Tax. As mentioned
previously, the state’s settlement with New Hampshire
hospitals could create additional pressure on the General
Fund, requiring somewhere between an estimated $67
million to $101 million in new spending over the next
biennium. Other pressures include funds necessary to
meet the state’s obligation under a recent lawsuit
requiring more spending on care for people with mental
illness, along with increasing costs associated with the
state’s Medicaid program. Finally, there are the likely
salary increases associated with the collective bargaining
agreement with state employees.
New Hampshire faces
a series of financial
questions that are
likely outside the
Legislature’s control,
but will – in the
absence of strong
revenue growth –
require tax changes or
spending cuts.
Revenues won’t keep pace with spending trends without significant fixes
The Center developed a forecast for state revenue over the next ten years, assuming that per-unit
taxes keep their rates unchanged, while other tax revenues increase at the assumed future rate of
growth of the economy (4.2 percent per year).9 Our simulation suggests that the state will see
natural revenue growth of 2.8 percent per year.
This is equal to the most recent economic growth forecast from the Congressional Budget Office: “The Budget and
Economic Outlook: 2014 to 2024,” Congressional Budget Office, February 2014
9
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
NH Revenue Type
Per Unit Unchanged
Per Unit Changed
Ad Valorem Stable
Ad Valorem Unstable
2013
$853.402
$205.900
$464.348
$738.174
$2,261.824
42
Share
38.9%
9.4%
21.2%
33.7%
Potential Revenue in
10 years
4.2% Annual
2023 Growth
$853.4
0.0%
$310.7
4.2%
$700.7
4.2%
$1,113.9
4.2%
$2,978.7
2.8%
What does this mean? Without either changes to the state’s revenue structure, a return to historic
economic growth, or significant slowdown in growth of spending, state budget writers will likely
face unbalanced budgets in the next number of budget cycles. As an example, the below table
shows what would happen if total expenditures grew at their historic rate (4.2 percent per year)
and revenues grew “naturally” – that is, without any adjustments in rates or new taxes. Under
these assumptions, over the next ten years, one could expect a significant budget deficit, as much
as $450 million, by 2023.
NH Revenue
NH Expenditures
2013
$2,261.824
$2,216.159
2023 Surplus/(Deficit)
2023
$2,895.3
$3,344.1
($448.77)
2.5%
4.2%
Of course, future predictions like this require assumptions and come with great uncertainty. State
policy makers have taken both spending and revenue approaches to solving budget issues in the
past. Policy makers will likely have to rely on a mix of approaches – changes in taxation and
spending – in order to maintain services demanded by the public.
Additional Resources


“Turbulent Times: New Hampshire’s State Budget, 2008 to 2013,” NHCPPS, May 2013.
http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/turbulent-times-nhamp39s-state-budget-2008-to-2013
“Counting on the Future: New Hampshire’s State Revenue Estimates,” NHCPPS, May
2011. http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/counting-on-the-future-new-hampshireamp39sstate-revenue-estimates
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
43
Natural Resources
New Hampshire’s natural resources are a source of enjoyment for the state’s residents and
visitors, and a vital part of New Hampshire’s economy. However, measuring the role these
resources play in New Hampshire’s economy or the well-being of its residents is not always
straightforward. The following data provides some context for such a discussion.
New Hampshire’s water systems are generally healthy
New Hampshire’s water resources are among the state’s most prized and valuable assets. The
state’s surface waters – lakes, ponds, streams, rivers and coastline – attract hundreds of
thousands of visitors annually, provide enjoyment to residents, and are a vital ingredient of the
high quality of life in the state. New Hampshire residents and industries rely on readily available
water for drinking and commercial activities.
When we talk about the state’s “water resources,” we are referring to a vast and complicated set
of systems, including surface waters, groundwater (and aquifers), municipal and other public
waters systems, private wells, and storm water and waste management systems.
New Hampshire is a relatively “low-use” state for water
On a per capita basis, use of water in New Hampshire is relatively low. New Hampshire’s
relatively limited water use is a function of the fact that our economy does not rely extensively
on water-intensive industry, nor do we have significant levels of agricultural use, which drive
demand in much of the rest of the country.
Total Water Use per Capita, 2005 by State
Per capita water use of all kinds
(saline & freshwater) in gal/day
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
New Hampshire
2,000
Idaho
Montana
West Virginia
Nebraska
Arkansas
Colorado
Virginia
Louisiana
Alabama
North Dakota
Texas
Oregon
Rhode Island
South Dakota
New Mexico
Alaska
Washington
Missouri
Indiana
North Carolina
Hawaii
Utah
Kansas
Maryland
Wyoming
California
Delaware
Illinois
Tennessee
Michigan
Iowa
Connecticut
Arizona
Kentucky
Florida
New Hampshire
Mississippi
Ohio
Nevada
Vermont
New Jersey
U.S. Virgin Islands
New York
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Georgia
Massachusetts
Oklahoma
Maine
Puerto Rico
District Of Columbia
0
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
44
And demand pressure on New Hampshire’s public and private drinking water systems has
declined on an average per capita basis over the past 30 years. In addition, peak use has remained
relatively stable, though in the most recent 10 year period (2002 –2012) total pumpage has
declined slightly in the major public water supply systems.
Estimating future demand by state residents is complicated by the uncertainty regarding
industrial use trends, state population projections, and the utilization of new efficiency
technologies. Between 1970 and 2000, the population in New Hampshire nearly doubled. But
during that same period (and since) residential water use per capita has declined. At the same
time, the decline of water-intensive industry in New Hampshire has meant even lower use of
available resources.
While domestic pressure on the state’s water system is likely to increase only slightly, and few
water systems have been forced to implement water control initiatives, peak monthly demand has
seen an increase during the summer months. While on average the peak demand has remained
relatively constant, the three highest demand months since 2000 have occurred in the past four
years.
Surface water quality is generally high, though data is incomplete
New Hampshire relies on a network of monitoring systems – including several key volunteerdriven programs – to monitor the state’s many lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, estuaries and
coastline. But there are significant gaps in that data, resulting in a limited ability to track
statewide or regional trends in quality over time. The state is in the process of redesigning its
strategy for monitoring surface water quality, with the goals of making analysis of changes over
time more readily available. Increasing the number of site-specific monitoring sites – in addition
to probabilistic assessments, based on statistically-based surveys of the state’s water bodies –
should remain a priority if the state has the goal of increasing its ability to track regional
variation and trends in surface water quality.
Future investment need for public water systems are significant
There is significant variation in what consumers in New Hampshire pay for water, as well as
significant investment requirements for water infrastructure due to age of plants. If consumer use
continues to decline, and fixed costs remain the same, the price of water to consumers and local
tax payers will increase. Future costs of the water infrastructure are not built into rates in most
communities, as currently structured. With declining state aid to municipalities and increasing
demand for other services, the implications for rate payers and local property tax payers could be
significant. Based on our assessment of quality and volume, New Hampshire’s water systems are
not yet in a state of crisis – but that does not mean that policymakers should not invest in a longrange planning and investment infrastructure blueprint.
Water management is a regional affair
Although we think of water as a local resource, for many of the state’s biggest communities,
including the largest cities of Manchester, Nashua and Concord, much of the drinking water
supply originates or flows beyond their municipal boundaries, suggesting that sustainable water
management will require regional efforts across multiple municipalities and towns.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
45
Out-of-state emissions are the biggest source of air pollution
The major contributor to air pollution in New England is the burning of fossil fuels, which
causes a number of different air pollutants to be released into the environment – including mononitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, and mercury. High levels of air pollution cause
smog, which can lead to asthma and other respiratory problems. Air pollution can also impact
ozone levels, resulting in wheezing, lung damage, and inflammation10.
To reduce dangerous emissions, PSNH’s Merrimack Station installed a system designed to
‘scrub’ out sulfur dioxide and mercury emissions which are produced through the burning of
coal. But while the measures taken by the PSNH Merrimack Station to reduce emissions are a
step in the right direction, a large share of the state’s air pollution actually originates in other
parts of the country.
A 2004 analysis by the NHDES and EPA estimated that at least 92 percent of New Hampshire’s
ozone and small particle air pollution is a direct result of air pollution transported via wind
patterns.11
A funding solution for NH’s water infrastructure remains elusive
The challenges facing New Hampshire’s water systems stem from mounting costs from years of
deferred infrastructural maintenance, growing pressure from climate changes, and changes in the
pattern of demand on public systems.
A special state commission in 2012 determined that the necessary statewide infrastructure
upgrades and repairs could cost roughly $3 billion. But many of the water system challenges,
including increased demand from public drinking water systems at periods of peak usage, are
highly localized, meaning different communities will feel these strains in varying degrees.
A major question is where funding to improve the water infrastructure in New Hampshire could
come from. Municipalities are under increasing stress from other areas of their budgets, making
it difficult for them to fully fund such projects. Among the ideas that have been considered in the
past, and may be resurrected in future debates:


Cities and towns could finance infrastructure projects by charging residents the full price
for water rates. Many New Hampshire communities currently charge residents well
below the cost of delivering water.
Lawmakers could add a surcharge on the price of beverage containers, which would be
set aside in a special statewide water infrastructure “trust fund.”
Affordable water services are part of the state’s competitive advantage. Burdening residents and
businesses with higher costs could potentially damage this advantage. For now, the future of
funding for water infrastructure improvements remains uncertain.
Source: Environmental Protection Agency http://www.epa.gov/glo/health.htm.
Source: Air Pollution Transport and How it Affects New Hampshire, New Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services (NHDES), May 2004.
10
11
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
46
How should state and local policy makers prioritize capital investment in water versus other
infrastructure needs? The first step would be to get a better understanding of how the capital
needs for water vary in comparison to those in other infrastructure areas. We know, for example,
that New Hampshire ranks 21st in the country with respect to water investment needs based on
the American Society of Civil Engineers 2013 report card. New Hampshire ranks even more
poorly when you look at other infrastructure needs like transportation. How local community and
state infrastructural investments are prioritized however, would obviously vary depending on the
community and its local circumstances.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
47
Energy in New Hampshire
New Hampshire is a high-cost, low-use state when it comes to energy
States with high energy costs, like New Hampshire and the other Northeastern states, tend to also
have low energy consumption (as measured by energy consumption per dollar of state gross
domestic product) as shown on the following charts. States with lower energy prices, including
net energy exporting states like North Dakota and Wyoming, tend to consume more energy per
dollar of economic activity.
Energy Consumption and Energy Prices by State
$20.00
Energy Consumption per $GDP
y = -0.9269x + 25.479
R2 = 0.6335
LA
$15.00
WY
ND
KYMS
WV
AL
AR
IN IA OK MT
SC
SD
ID TX
NE
KS
TN NM
OH
ME
MO
GA
MI
WI
MN
PA
UT
NC
IL
COWAVA
FL
VT
AZ
OR
NV
NJ MD NH
CA
RI
DE
MA
CT
NY
$10.00
$5.00
$0.00
$0.00
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$30.00
$35.00
Energy Price (per million BTU)
New Hampshire was the ninth lowest per capita consumer of energy among the states in 2011.
This is due in part to the state’s relatively low proportion of energy-intensive heavy industry. In
2012, the industrial sector represented only 12 percent of energy use in the state.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
48
New Hampshire's Energy Use by Sector (2012)
Transportation
36%
Industrial
12%
Residential
29%
Commercial
23%
Unlike some other parts of the country, New Hampshire has no in-state sources of fossil fuels or
uranium. Thus, to meet the energy needs of state businesses and residents, most energy must be
imported. In 2012, New Hampshire had to import 90 percent of energy used. With such a large
percentage of the state’s energy resources met through imported sources, the state’s energy
supply is vulnerable to disruptions from weather, price volatility, changing dynamics in the
commodities market, political unrest, and other factors beyond our control.
An emphasis on “clean” energy is shifting New Hampshire’s energy mix
Over five decades, the energy consumption mix in New Hampshire has changed in response to
policies aimed at reducing carbon emissions. Most recently, New Hampshire has decreased its
dependence on coal and distillate fuel oil, and is relying more on natural gas and nuclear electric
power.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
49
New Hampshire Energy Consumption by Fuel Type (Millions of BTU)
Biomass
Hydroelectric Power
Nuclear Electric Power
Other Petroleum
Residual Fuel Oil
Motor Gasoline
LPG
Jet Fuel
Distillate Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
Coal
450000
400000
350000
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
2012
2010
2008
2006
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
1968
1966
1964
1962
1960
0
The state has attempted to address its energy needs through several policies.
Residents are already encouraged to invest in renewable energy sources through a series of tax
incentives on the local, state, and federal levels.
The Renewable Energy Act in 2007 established renewable portfolio standards that require
electricity suppliers to increase their percentage of power generated by different renewable
energy sources until 2025. This will require at least two major changes:
1) reduce overall energy use; and
2) increase the total amount of renewable energy in the gross energy use mix.
New Hampshire's Renewable Portfolio Standard requires one quarter (25 percent) of electricity
sold to come from renewable energy resources by 2025. In 2013, that figure stood at 16 percent.
Efforts to shift to renewable energy are far from clear-cut
In early 2013, the state began to lay the groundwork for the development of a ten-year energy
strategy.12 The new energy strategy is intended to include sections on renewable energy, fuel
diversity and energy efficiency. But while the state has been focused on obtaining more energy
from renewable sources, there has been some controversy over two issues relating to renewable
energy.
The Northern Pass, a proposed project to build power lines transmitting energy from
hydroelectric plants in Canada to a converter terminal and substation in Central New Hampshire,
has encountered heavy opposition from groups who see the lines as harmful to New Hampshire’s
environment and natural beauty. Others worry that private land could be seized under eminent
domain.
12
Source: SB 191-FN-A http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2013/SB0191_HA.html
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
50
In June 2013, the developers of the Northern Pass project announced a new proposed route to
limit the number of private properties affected by the transmission line and also includes plans to
bury a section of the transmission line.
In the summer of 2014, the Northern Pass project committed to a series of open house meetings
with landowners along the proposed route to identify ways to improve the project. The new
president of Public Service of New Hampshire has also been reaching out to environmental
groups opposed to the project.
In addition, New Hampshire is a participant in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI),
which authorizes a mandatory cap-and-trade program for CO2 emissions from fossil-fueled
power plants among ten northeastern states. RGGI was the USA’s first market-based regulatory
program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
New Hampshire had been receiving between $3 million and $4 million per quarter from the
RGGI auctions, an amount determined by the auction price of carbon in the RGGI market. As of
June 2014 New Hampshire received a total of $70 million.
The auction proceeds are funneled towards projects aimed at improving energy efficiency or
reducing demand. These projects can engage non-profits, utilities, businesses, residents,
municipalities, universities, and schools to reduce emissions and increase energy education
efforts.
Critics of the RGGI point to New Jersey dropping out of the agreement in 2011 as a sign that the
RGGI compact would soon dissolve. However, the RGGI price to emit carbon dioxide in the
U.S. Northeast rose by a third after the region’s cap-and-trade program revised its rules to cut the
supply of permits in early 2014, breathing new life into the program.
Looking ahead
Energy costs remain a drag on New Hampshire’s economy
Numerous rankings that stack New Hampshire against other states have noted our relatively high
prices for industrial electricity and natural gas. This is an especially critical issue for businesses
and the state economy, as low state energy costs can offer a significant competitive edge against
other locations.
But what are the state’s goals in energy policy? If we want lower costs, New Hampshire clearly
has a long way to go. Every current public policy effort is steering markets away from oil and
coal, and focusing on energy independence and a green(er) economy, with little regard to the
impact on the cost of energy. This policy focus is exemplified in the Renewable Portfolio
Standard, which requires electricity providers to meet customer load through renewable energy
sources.
Addressing energy demand is a challenge
New natural gas pipelines into New England are needed, but new construction is not guaranteed.
First, the natural gas pipeline companies are reluctant to build unless they have some assurance
that new customers will commit to buying up the increased gas supply (most existing gas
customers in New England purchase on the spot market).
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
51
Second, getting more natural gas to New Hampshire will mean gas pipelines that traverse
through other New England states, which will likely be met with local resistance. Kinder Morgan
has proposed a multi-billion natural gas pipeline that would enter western Massachusetts from
the heart of Pennsylvania gas country. Already a dozen Massachusetts towns along the proposed
route have passed non-binding resolutions against the project over concerns about declining
property values, the potential for explosions, and damage to forests, wetlands, and watersheds.
Given the national opposition to the Keystone Pipeline, and the local opposition to the proposed
Northern Pass electric transmission line project, this local resistance is not surprising.
The fate of PSNH is still unsettled
The New Hampshire Legislature has directed the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission
(NHPUC) to start a proceeding before January 1, 2015 to determine whether all or some of
PSNH's generation assets should be divested. The NHPUC must submit a progress report to the
Legislative Oversight Committee on electric utility restructuring by March 31, 2015.
PSNH is one of the few electric utilities in the country that still owns generating assets, bucking
a transformation that started in the late 1990’s. PSNH was allowed to keep its oil and coal fired
generating plants in 2001, and retains them today. But a trend towards natural gas and away from
coal-fired plants means much less demand for PSNH’s plants. A generating asset that is not used,
because the cost of running it is higher than the prevailing market price of power, is of little
value.
Another issue surrounding divestiture is “stranded cost” – the difference between the book value
and market value of PSNH generation. On April 1, 2014, the NHPUC staff issued a report which
recommended that PSNH sell off its oil and coal generating plants on the seacoast and in Bow,
NH. The NHPUC analysis estimated the fair market value of PSNH’s generation assets to be
$225 million as of December 31, 2013 and compared that amount to a stated net book value of
$660 million, implying potential “stranded costs” in excess of $400 million.
PSNH has not only resisted divestiture, but also points out that both present law and the PSNH
Restructuring Settlement Agreement approved in 2000 require that the NHPUC provide stranded
cost recovery to PSNH. Recovering $400 million in stranded costs over next ten years would
raise PSNH electric bills by 1.5 cents per KWH, or $8 a month for the typical 500 KWH
customer.
While many of these policy discussions are occurring because New Hampshire energy prices are
among the highest in the country, the proposed policy solutions like the new tariff will likely
mean higher prices in the short term, with the promise of more stability and lower carbon
emissions in the long term.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
52
Crime and Corrections in New Hampshire
New Hampshire enjoys a relatively low crime rate
As measured by crime rate, New Hampshire has consistently been ranked on of the safest states
in the nation. The state enjoyed the ninth lowest crime rate out of the 50 states in 2012. However,
the state’s property crime rate ranked higher than its violent crime rate. While New Hampshire’s
violent crime rate was third-lowest in the country, the property crime rate was 12th-lowest.
Crime Rates per hundred thousand people in 2012 by State
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
New Hampshire
3,000
2,000
1,000
.
Id
ah
o
Va
.
N
.Y
.
C
on
n.
a
N
.H
s.
Io
w
M
as
.
a.
.V
W
.I.
Ky
h.
R
M
ic
s.
ol
o.
M
is
C
ai
i
ta
h
U
aw
H
hi
o
In
d.
O
.
.
Ka
ns
.
Fl
a
a.
Te
x
kl
O
.
a.
Al
La
.
C
Ar
iz
N
D
.M
.
0
Crime overall is declining, though property crime is on the rise
In 2012, New Hampshire’s crime rate was 2,512 per 100,000 residents – 25 percent lower than
the national average of 3,246 per 100,000 residents.
In general, the crime rate, both in New Hampshire and nationally, has declined since the early
1990s. But while the New Hampshire rate increased slightly over the past eight years, the US
crime rate has continued to fall steadily. This increase in the New Hampshire overall crime rate
was driven mainly by a 15 percent increase in the state property crime rate, specifically larcenytheft.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
53
All Crimes Rate
Crimes per hundred thousand people, FBI Uniform Crime Reports
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
11
05
08
20
20
02
20
99
20
96
19
93
19
90
New Hampshire
19
84
81
87
19
19
19
75
72
78
19
19
19
66
69
19
19
63
19
19
19
60
0
United States-Total
Juvenile crime in New Hampshire is on the decline
Contrary to the popular impression that juvenile crime is increasing, crimes by young people –
and the provision of juvenile justice services – are declining in New Hampshire. Juvenile male
crime rates dropped from about 586 arrests per 10,000 juveniles (11 to 17 years old) in 2007 to
396 per 10,000 in 2013. Juvenile female crime rates declined from 281 in 2007 to 180 in 2013.13
All Crime Rate per 10,000 - NH Age 11 to 17
700
600
586.1
Males
Females
581.5
548.3
531.5
500
462.7
431.1
396.1
400
300
281.5
274.8
277.4
249.7
248.2
216.3
180.5
200
100
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Source: State Arrest Reports, New Hampshire Department of Safety
Persons aged 17 and older are prosecuted as adults, but Department of Safety crime statistics are only reported for
the 11-17 age group.
13
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
54
Recent corrections reforms have had an impact on inmate populations
In 1980, fewer than 300 inmates were housed in state prisons. By 1989, that number had risen to
over 1,000 inmates, and doubled to 2,000 by 1994. Today, the New Hampshire prison system
houses about 2,800 inmates, at an average annual cost of $35,000 per inmate. Nearly as many
inmates are housed in the 10 county jails, at about the same cost per inmate.
While approximately half of the inmates in state prisons are being held for non-violent offenses,
older inmates are more likely to be held for violent crimes, such as murder and sexual assault,
which tend to have longer sentences than property and drug crimes.
Violent offenders – those convicted of manslaughter, aggravated assault and other physical
threats to society – make up only half of the inmate population within the walls of the prison
system.
NH State Prison Population by Major Offense
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
Property
Violent
Public Order
Drugs Alcohol
Other Jurisdictions
500
O
ct
D 09
ec
Fe 09
b1
Ap 0
r-1
Ju 0
nAu 10
gO 10
ct
D 10
ec
Fe 10
b1
Ap 1
r-1
Ju 1
nAu 11
gO 11
ct
D 11
ec
Fe 11
b1
Ap 2
r-1
Ju 2
nAu 12
gO 12
ct
D 12
ec
Fe 12
b1
Ap 3
r-1
Ju 3
nAu 13
gO 13
ct
D 13
ec
Fe 13
b1
Ap 4
r-1
Ju 4
n14
0
In 2010, the New Hampshire Legislature adopted a slate of reforms aimed at reducing recidivism
among state inmates. The reforms, referred to as Senate Bill 500 (or the Justice Reinvestment
Act), included
 greater investment in treatment for high-risk offenders,
 ensured that everyone leaving prison receive at least nine months of supervision,
 required the release of nonviolent offenders after they have served no more than 120
percent of their minimum sentence,
 limited the length of time a person could spend re-incarcerated on a parole violation.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
55
Partially due to these provisions, the state prison inmate population dropped by 300 inmates from
November 2010 to November 2011.
However, in the following year legislators passed a new parole reform bill that made several
changes to the Justice Reinvestment Act. These included giving the parole board discretion to
exclude a prisoner convicted of a violent crime or a sexually violent offense who is nearing his
or her maximum sentence from mandatory supervised release. The parole board also has the
discretion to extend or reduce the 90-day period of re-incarceration for a parole violation, under
specified circumstances.
This second round of reforms had an immediate impact on the state prison inmate population,
which started to rise again, increasing by 200 inmates from December 2011 to July 2013.
State Prison Inmate Population Under Justice Reinvestment
New Hampshire State Prison Population
2,800
SB 500 Era
SB52 Era
2,700
2,600
2,500
2,400
2,300
2,200
Ju
l-1
Au 0
g1
Se 0
p1
O 0
ct
-1
N 0
ov
-1
D 0
ec
-1
Ja 0
n1
Fe 1
b1
M 1
ar
-1
Ap 1
rM 11
ay
-1
Ju 1
n1
Ju 1
l-1
Au 1
g1
Se 1
p1
O 1
ct
-1
N 1
ov
-1
D 1
ec
-1
Ja 1
n1
Fe 2
b1
M 2
ar
-1
Ap 2
rM 12
ay
-1
Ju 2
n1
Ju 2
l-1
Au 2
g1
Se 2
p1
O 2
ct
-1
N 2
ov
-1
D 2
ec
-1
Ja 2
n1
Fe 3
b1
M 3
ar
-1
Ap 3
rM 13
ay
-1
Ju 3
n1
Ju 3
l-1
3
2,100
The Justice Reinvestment Act can be considered a success, as the evidence suggests that the state
was able to reduce the state prison population in 2011, as well as hold state prison expenditures
constant for two years. More importantly, the evidence suggests that the safety of the New
Hampshire population was not compromised in this time period and that municipal and county
safety and correction costs did not increase as a result of the reforms of SB500.14
More information available in the Center’s report on “New Hampshire’s Prison Population, Post SB-500”,
available at http://www.nhpolicy.org/report/new-hampshireamp39s-prison-population-post-sb-500
14
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
56
Looking ahead
A number of additional corrections reforms have been introduced in New Hampshire in recent
years, with the dual goals of improving public safety while lowering overall corrections costs.
Community corrections programs are expanding across the state
Community corrections programs are an alternative to costly incarceration for non-violent
offenders. These programs:



Allow offenders to live in the community under strict supervision.
Ensure that offenders are accountable for their actions and repay the victims and the
community for damages while the public’s safety is protected.
Attempt to address the social factors that fuel criminal behavior, such as drug addiction,
homelessness, and unemployment, among others.
Under the 2010 Justice Reinvestment Act, the New Hampshire Department of Corrections
established a Division of Community Corrections (DCC), which completed its first year of
existence in 2011. The DCC has engaged in developing a completely new and science-based
approach to assessment, case management and re-entry planning for offenders, including
developing and operating the Parole Violator services at the Berlin prison.
Community corrections programs also exist outside of the state prison system. Strafford County
operates several community-based corrections programs, including a bail supervision program,
home confinement/electronic monitoring, community work programs, jail-based residential drug
abuse treatment, and a step-down program for current jail inmates.15
Diversion programs
Diversion programs intervene before a non-violent, first-time offender goes to trial with an
opportunity instead to participate in a program of community service and psycho-educational
classes. Merrimack County currently operates an adult diversion program for first time felony,
misdemeanor, and drug offenders.16
Across the state, the New Hampshire Juvenile Court Diversion Network17 focuses to divert firsttime juvenile offenders out of the juvenile court system and into appropriate social services that
support the juveniles and their families to prevent further delinquent behavior. Restorative
justice, the idea that the juvenile will be held accountable for repairing the damage caused by
his/her crime, is a central component to these programs. Various non-profit, social service,
municipal, and court-sponsored organizations operate juvenile diversion programs in all New
Hampshire counties.
Strafford County Community Corrections. http://co.strafford.nh.us/jail/community_corrections.html.
Merrimack County Diversion Program. http://www.merrimackcounty.net/html/county_attorney.html.
17
New Hampshire Juvenile Court Diversion Program. www.nhcourtdiversion.org.
15
16
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
57
Problem-solving courts and alternative sentencing
Problem-solving courts18 are designed to address social issues, such as drug abuse and mental
illness, which are often the underlying problems of criminal behavior. They aim to link
participants to treatment services to address offenders’ substance abuse and mental health issues
that led to criminal behavior, thereby reducing recidivism and protecting public safety. The goal,
and challenge, of these courts is to balance punishment for a crime with successful and costeffective rehabilitation while protecting the public’s safety.
One of the key factors distinguishing problem-solving courts from traditional courts is a team
approach. The judge, defense attorney, prosecutor, treatment provider, probation officer, and
case manager, among others, come to consensus about what sanctions and treatment will be
mandated for the offender. This shared decision-making differs significantly from the traditional,
more adversarial, approach of criminal courts.
Three counties, Grafton, Rockingham and Strafford, have several years of experience in
operating adult drug court programs19 for felony level offenders with substance abuse issues
under the supervision of the county’s Superior Court. Sullivan County has started a researchbased program focused on rehabilitation and offender reintegration. Cheshire County was
recently awarded a federal grant for nearly $1 million to expand its drug court program, which
opened in June 2013 and aims to put felony drug offenders into treatment instead of prison.20
Further discussion of drug courts and other problem-solving courts can be found at the Bureau of Justice
Assistance. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/ or the National Drug Court Institute. www.ndci.org.
19
Drug court programs connect non-violent, substance-abusing offenders to an integrated system of alcohol and
drug treatment in the community combined with strict court supervision and sanctions.
20
Our thanks to Donna Sytek, chair of the Adult Parole Board, for details on the new programs in Sullivan and
Cheshire counties.
18
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
58
Appendix: New Hampshire’s Regions
The people of New Hampshire have long valued the concepts of strong local identity and
governance. Annual town and school district meetings still shape the political life in many
communities. The New Hampshire Legislature, with 424 members, gives even the state’s
smallest towns a voice in the lawmaking process. And with a relatively weak system of county
government, the vast majority of towns and cities provide their own services – police and fire
departments, public schools, administrators and boards of selectmen – further strengthening the
sense of local identity and oversight.
But in the realm of policy work, relatively little attention has focused on the state as a network of
distinct regions. Aside from the North Country, which in recent years has faced challenges in
economic development, New Hampshire’s regions generally play a small role in public policy
conversations about the state’s future.
This oversight is unfortunate. New Hampshire, despite its size, is clearly a collage of diverse and
distinct regions. Geography offers an easy template to carve up the state, but an analysis of more
quantitative data – economic trends, education levels, and migratory patterns – underscores a
simple reality: New Hampshire’s residents face different challenges and enjoy different
opportunities depending on what part of the state they call home. An approach to policymaking
that accounts for this fact will likely lead to more deliberate decision-making.
Of course, this approach is not without its flaws. A regional analysis masks many town-by-town
variations, obscuring stark disparities within a region. For instance, statistics for the “Greater
Manchester” region alone do not illuminate the differences in wealth, education demographics
between Manchester and Bedford, two neighboring communities with very different sets of
challenges and opportunities. But, for many public policy questions, a regional analysis offers a
useful lens for understanding New Hampshire’s major issues.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
New Hampshire's regions
59
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
60
New Hampshire’s regions: some indicators
What types of data should we consider when trying to define New Hampshire’s regions? What
are the best indicators of a community’s current and future challenges? What measurements help
us compare one region to another?
In the following, we highlight a handful of major statistical indicators that, taken together, offer a
high-level view of the state’s regional variation.21 We then examine each of those regions in
greater detail.
Population density varies greatly across New Hampshire
People per Square Mile, 2010
773.2
544.7
375.9
220.6
101.6
20.0
80.4
96.1
28.4
One defining difference among New Hampshire’s regions is population density. While it is no
shock that the state’s population is distributed unevenly, the disparity among regions is stark.
Generally speaking, New Hampshire’s population density increases the further south you travel.
Population density ranges from 20 people per square mile in the Great North Woods to almost
775 people per square mile in the Greater Nashua region – or nearly 40 times more people per
square mile than in far northern New Hampshire. The statewide population density is 147 people
per square mile.
Charts compiling this data, and more, can be found at the end of this report. You can also find a set of interactive
maps illustrating this data at nhpolicy.org/visual-aids/maps.
21
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
61
Property values are strongly aligned with population density
Property Value per Acre, 2013
$131,866
$79,631
$74,014
$32,111
$28,119
$16,414
$2,511
$14,135
$7,527
Property values correlate with population density in New Hampshire. Generally speaking, the
more densely populated a region of the state is, the higher its property values are. The one
exception is the Lakes Region, which is the state’s sixth most densely-populated region, but has
the fifth highest property values per acre. This is largely due to the many waterfront and seasonal
homes throughout the region.
These variations help shape real estate markets, new housing construction, planning and zoning
regulations, and business development in each region – all key topics for the state’s economic
future.
The variation in the poverty rate across New Hampshire is another illustration of the economic
strength of each region. For the most part, poverty rates increase as you travel further north in the
state.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
62
Poverty rates are higher in the northern part of the state
Percent of Persons in Poverty, 2008-2012
13.5%
11.4%
11.7%
9.1%
9.6%
8.4%
8.3%
8.2%
5.6%
Levels of educational attainment are generally higher in Southern NH
Percent of Adult Population with a Bachelor's Degree or Higher, 2008-2012
38.8%
38.2%
36.6%
34.6%
31.3%
27.7%
14.3%
28.1%
32.0%
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
63
Another regional indicator tied to average income and poverty rates is education level. The
previous figure illustrates the percentage of the population in each region of the state that holds a
bachelor’s degree or higher. Generally speaking, the higher the rate of educational attainment,
the higher the average income and the lower the poverty rate in a region.
New Hampshire’s regions in depth
In the following section, we offer more detail about each of New Hampshire’s nine regions.
What industries help power their economies? How old, educated, and well-paid are their
residents? How far do they travel to work every day, and how likely are they to have come to
New Hampshire from elsewhere? The answers to these and other questions help give texture to
the daily life and economy in each of these regions and provide a starting point to understanding
their futures.
Great North Woods
At the state’s far northern tip, the Great North Woods is New Hampshire’s oldest, poorest and
least-densely populated region. Over the most recent decade measured by the U.S. Census (2000
to 2010), the region’s population total dropped slightly – the only
region in the state to lose population. The median age of residents
of the Great North Woods is 50.3 years, nearly six years higher
than the statewide median. And 20 percent of its population is
over the age of 65 – the highest percentage in the state. If, as
projected, the share of residents aged 65 and older in the Great
North Woods continues to increase at a steady pace, the region’s
health-care, housing and transportation infrastructure will face
new pressures that should be addressed.
The Great North Woods is also the region whose economy is
most dependent upon natural resources (including forest and
wood products) though there have been several efforts in recent
years to diversify the economy. Other important industries here
include government (due in part to the state and federal prisons in
Berlin), accommodation and food services (because of tourism),
and health care and social assistance (because of the large portion
of senior citizens and the relatively high poverty rate). The
average weekly wage of $626 is the lowest in the state and roughly one-third lower than the
statewide average wage.
The region’s remoteness, as well as the scarcity of economic infrastructure like high-speed
wireless internet, poses challenges for revitalization and growth. The portion of the adult
population with a bachelor’s degree, at 14 percent, is the lowest of any region in New Hampshire
and less than half the statewide rate of 34 percent. Compared to the rest of New Hampshire,
residents in the Great North Woods are also the least likely to be born out of state.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
64
White Mountains
The White Mountains are a center of tourism and outdoor recreation, both of which power this
region’s economy. Conway, Haverhill and Littleton are the major labor market areas, but it is the
800,000-acre White Mountain National Forest that defines the area, both geographically and
economically.
The White Mountain-area economy is disproportionately weighed toward accommodation and
food service, recreation, entertainment and retail trade – all sectors driven by tourism. The region
also has the highest portion of seasonal homes in the state (36 percent of the housing stock).
However, the poverty rate here is among the highest in New Hampshire, and average weekly
wages are among the lowest in the state. Many workers in the White Mountain region hold
multiple jobs at once or balance several seasonal jobs throughout the year – partly because of the
tourism-centered economy. A more diversified economy would be one way to address the
economic imbalance in the region. Recent efforts to do so include the development of the
TechVillage in Conway, which seeks to attract smaller, full-time employers to the region.
In addition, the prevalence of seasonal homes
has put pressure on the need for workforce
housing in the region. The buying power of
wealthy vacationers and second-home owners
can inflate prices across the real estate market,
making it difficult for younger workers
earning lower wages to buy homes. A
coordinated, regional approach to housing
development – with a focus on smaller units in
denser developments – is one way to address
this problem, and such efforts are currently
underway.
Still, the past few years have seen substantial growth in the White Mountain region. Between
2000 and 2010, the area had the highest rate of population increase of any region in New
Hampshire, with an increase of 11.2 percent. Although, the region still has the second smallest
overall population in the state. The White Mountain region also has the second-highest median
age of any area of the state and one of the lowest percentages of school-age children. With an
aging population, driven in large part by transplanted retirees, the White Mountain region will
need to ensure it has the sufficient workforce to keep its tourism and service industries thriving.
This challenge also relates to the region’s housing needs, as discussed above: Will the region
have sufficient and the right mix of housing stock to provide homes for those workers in years to
come?
Lakes Region
Like its neighbor to the north, the Lakes Region is a hub for tourism, most of it centering on the
dozens of lakes and ponds that dot the area. The biggest body of water in the region – and in the
state – is Lake Winnipesaukee, where the offerings range from the quiet, resort village of
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
65
Wolfeboro to the more raucous entertainments of Weirs Beach, home to a lively boardwalk and
the annual Laconia Motorcycle Week.
The Lakes Region has a large share of seasonal homes (31 percent of all housing) and the
second-lowest average property tax in the state. The average wage is about 25 percent below the
statewide average, with construction, health care and tourism-based services accounting for a
large share of economic activity.
The median age here is 46 and the region has the third-highest percentage of residents over the
age of 65 in the state (17 percent). With the
anticipated health needs of that older population
in coming years, attracting and maintaining a
younger workforce to serve them remains a
challenge for the Lakes Region. The region’s
lakes and mountains remain a lure for many
retirees. But there is also concern among some
employers that the Lakes Region needs to develop
more cultural and entertainment options to attract
younger workers and families. Diversifying the
economy to include those “quality of life”
offerings remains a challenge in the coming years.
In addition, as in the White Mountains region, the
prevalence of seasonal homes in the real estate
market can drive up prices for working-class families, forcing many of them to live far from their
place of employment. Still, the Lakes Region has the smallest percentage of workers commuting
to out-of-state jobs of any of New Hampshire’s regions.
Dartmouth/Lake Sunapee
The Dartmouth/Lake Sunapee Region derives its name from the college and medical center on its
western edge and the body of water at its center. Dartmouth College, in Hanover, and the
Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, in Lebanon, provide much of the intellectual and
economic energy for the region.
The predominance of education and health care in the region’s economy have helped make it
more resilient to economic ups and downs. Much of the Dartmouth/Lake Sunapee region is
economically quite strong, especially in the Hartford-Lebanon-Hanover Labor Market Area. It is
one of just two regions in New Hampshire with more jobs than employed residents. Thus, it sees
net in-commuting for work, with many of those commuting workers coming from neighboring
Vermont. The educational attainment in the region, as measured by the percentage of adults with
a bachelor’s degree, is the highest in the state.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
66
Not surprisingly, given the presence of the medical center, health care and social assistance
dominate the region’s economy, with about 27 percent of all wages coming from those
industries. Hospital payroll per employee is the highest of
any region in New Hampshire. The medical center has
also attracted allied businesses such as medical device
companies and research and design firms, in Lebanon and
elsewhere. These firms have also driven commercial real
estate development in the region.
Although the economy is dominated by the medical and
education services in Hanover and Lebanon, the region’s
largest city is Claremont. The city is also among the
state’s so-called “property poor” communities, where
disparities in education spending have fueled legislative
and court debates for two decades. In fact, the name
“Claremont,” a reference to the landmark state Supreme
Court case that overturned the state’s old method of
paying for public schools, remains shorthand for the stillcontroversial topic. However, Claremont has seen
successes in recent years. The population of the city has
started to increase over the past decade, and coordinated redevelopment in the mill district has
led to new businesses in the downtown core.
Still, the region still retains something of a bifurcated structure. Incomes, home values and
education levels are among the highest in the state for the towns closest to the college, the
medical center and the lake itself. Yet many of the region’s outlying communities struggle with
economic development issues.
Monadnock Region
With its small villages, old town greens and absence of interstate highways, the Monadnock
Region offers a version of classic New England.
Economically, this region closely mirrors New
Hampshire as a whole, with its average gross
income, unemployment and poverty rates, and
balance of industries closely matching the
statewide figures. The median age in the
Monadnock Region is 44, about a year below the
state median. The percentage of the population
over the age of 65 is close to the statewide
percentage (14.9 percent in Monadnock vs. 13.7
percent for all of New Hampshire).
The Monadnock Region’s population grew by 6 percent between 2000 and 2010, close to the
statewide population increase of 6.5 percent. Keene is the largest city and economic hub of the
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
67
region. It is home to Keene State College, part of the University System of New Hampshire, as
well as Antioch University New England, Franklin Pierce University, and River Valley
Community College’s Keene campus.
Construction and manufacturing are highly concentrated in the Monadnock Region, with the
latter supplying the highest share of total wages. Property tax rates in the Monadnock Region are
the third-highest in the state.
As a community, the citizens of the Monadnock Region rank quality-of-life issues as high
priorities. Residents and community leaders here often speak of their unique view of civic
engagement and community involvement. For example, the Healthy Monadnock 2020 initiative
strives to make the area the healthiest community in the country by the year 2020. In addition to
this effort, there are several other examples of collaborative spirit in the Region such as Arts
Alive!, Monadnock Farm and Community Connection, and Monadnock Buy Local.
Seacoast
Officially, New Hampshire's Seacoast is the 18-mile strip of oceanfront linking the state to the
Atlantic. But the economic ripples from this vital region reach far inland. The region includes the
inland coastal communities of Great Bay and the coastal rivers. There are several hundreds of
miles of inland coast both in Rockingham and Strafford Counties.
The Seacoast has a diverse economy that includes more
than a quarter of New Hampshire’s labor force – the
highest share in the state. Among the major employers
shaping this region are the Pease Tradeport in
Portsmouth and the Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine,
which employ hundreds of people. Rochester-Dover is
a major labor market area, and Durham is home to the
main campus of the University of New Hampshire.
Portsmouth is a center for tourism and the arts, and the
Seacoast’s shore towns host hordes of out-of-state
tourists throughout the summer months. People in
general are attracted to the excellent quality of life –
beauty, transportation, jobs, access to recreation,
Boston, and sense of community as small town, rural or
Main Street sense of place.
Wedged between Maine and Massachusetts, the
Seacoast region has the second-highest portion of
residents born out of state, at just over 60 percent, and
the second-highest portion of workers commuting to out of state jobs as any region in New
Hampshire. Average household income is the second highest of the state’s regions, and property
values rank third highest. But like other regions of the state where tourism and second-home
ownership help fuel the economy, the Seacoast faces challenges related to affordable housing.
This includes housing for young workers and families, and also elderly residents.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
68
The region’s population increased 8.6 percent between 2000 and 2010, higher than the statewide
growth rate over that period. And the Seacoast is home to the largest share of New Hampshire’s
population of any of the state’s regions, with 22 percent of people calling it home.
With this growth has come increased traffic on the region’s road networks, and this issue has
received much attention from local planners. Several major throughways cross the region,
including Interstate 95, and Routes 101, 4 and 16. Those roads draw visitors and workers to the
region. Still, unique to New Hampshire, Seacoast has a fairly diverse transportation system,
including intercity buses, Amtrak and multimodal transit center in Portsmouth. The expansion of
the Little Bay Bridge is expected to be completed by 2020, which regional planners hope will
have a positive impact on economic development at Pease, Portsmouth, Dover, Rochester, and
Durham.
Managing the transportation network will have considerable impacts on economic development,
the environment and the quality of life for Seacoast residents. It will also require collaboration
across town lines, forcing communities to think beyond the needs of their individual
municipalities.
Merrimack Valley Region
The Merrimack Valley is the most densely settled area in New Hampshire. The state's three
largest cities – Concord, Manchester, and Nashua – can be found here, representing the centers
of government, finance, and manufacturing for the state. Interstate 93 slices through this region,
offering access to the Boston economy and out-of-state jobs, especially for those living in the
southern portion of the region. While the Merrimack Valley’s population is the youngest in the
state, the region – like the rest of New Hampshire – is aging and must consider steps to retain
and attract young and middle-aged workers if it wishes to remain economically competitive.
More than 45 percent of New Hampshire’s total population calls the Merrimack Valley home,
and the region’s economy is diverse. Because of that, we have divided the Merrimack Valley
into three sub-regions for this report, with one sub-region for each of the area’s major urban
hubs.
Greater Concord
With the state capital at its center, the Greater Concord region counts government as its major
industry. Government employment provides 26 percent of the region’s wages, twice the state
average for that sector. Health care and social assistance is the second largest sector, accounting
for 18 percent of the region’s salaries.
Concord, located at the juncture of three highways, is the region’s employment and commercial
hub. State government and Concord Hospital are the city’s major employers.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
69
Greater Concord had a higher rate of
population growth in the 2000s than the rest
of the Merrimack Valley Region, increasing
6.3 percent over that decade. Yet, compared
to the state’s other major cities, Greater
Concord is still relatively underdeveloped.
Population density here is less than a third
that of Greater Nashua, for instance. Concord
itself, beyond the compact downtown,
includes large swathes of protected woods
and open space, as do many neighboring
towns. This landscape illustrates a
fundamental tension for the region as it contemplates its future: how to encourage and
accommodate growth without undermining the desire to maintain a rural character. Recent
development projects in Concord have refocused attention on the city’s downtown core, though
other communities – Suncook and Penacook, for instance – are also looking for ways to
reinvigorate their commercial districts.
The poverty rate of 8.3 percent is slightly lower than the statewide rate, as is average household
income. Residents of Greater Concord are among the least likely to work out of state, with just 4
percent crossing the border for a job compared to 16 percent statewide.
Greater Concord’s median age, 42 years, is lower than the statewide median age of 45 years,
though the percentage of residents older than 65 here is nearly even with the statewide
percentage.
Property tax rates in the Greater Concord region are the highest in the Merrimack Valley, while
property value per acre is the lowest in the region. With a large share of government-owned
property, the portion of land exempt from the property tax is nearly twice the state average.
Greater Manchester
Greater Manchester, with the state’s largest city at its heart, has a diverse economy based on
finance and insurance services, information services, manufacturing and health care.
This region’s population is the youngest in the state. The median age here is 40 years, nearly five
years younger than the statewide median. Only 11 percent of the population is over the age of 65,
also the lowest percentage of any region in New Hampshire. Within the Merrimack Valley
region, Greater Manchester has the lowest level of educational attainment – 32 percent of the
adult population has a bachelor’s degree or better.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
70
Radiating from the city of Manchester, this
region includes a ring of smaller towns that
range from working-class communities like
Goffstown to upscale bedroom communities
like Bedford. About 13 percent of Greater
Manchester residents work out of state,
slightly lower than the statewide rate.
Manchester has witnessed an economic
revival in recent years, with the conversion of
many former mill buildings into office space,
the construction of a minor league ballpark
along the Merrimack River and a gradual
increase in the downtown dining and
entertainment establishments. However, while the Greater Manchester region has the youngest
population in the state, it also saw a drop in its school-age population from 2000 to 2010 that
exceeded the statewide figure, though only slightly.
Economically, Manchester has several significant and unique assets: the Manchester/Boston
Regional airport within short driving distance to the downtown; several colleges and universities
(Southern New Hampshire University, St. Anselm College, UNH’s Manchester campus and
Manchester Community College) and proximity to the interstate highway system.
But like many regions, Greater Manchester is still trying to attract and retain young, educated
workers. Potential hurdles to that task include the lack of a major public transit system (including
passenger rail).
The region has the second-highest percentage of foreign-born residents in the state – 7.3 percent.
Greater Manchester is also home to a large share of New Hampshire’s Hispanic population – 4.5
percent of the region’s population. Over the past decade, the Hispanic population in Great
Manchester increased more than 75 percent.
Greater Nashua
Greater Nashua is the most densely populated region in the state, with about 775 people per
square mile (twice the Merrimack Valley average and more than five times the New Hampshire
average). Straddling two major north-south highway networks, this region’s residents are the
most likely to be born outside of New Hampshire and the most likely to work out of state. The
region also has one of the highest percentage of residents with bachelor’s degrees – about 38
percent – and the highest percentage of Hispanic residents – roughly 5 percent.
Economically, Greater Nashua is one of New Hampshire’s most vibrant regions. Establishments
in Greater Nashua are concentrated in finance and insurance, professional and technical services,
and trade. But one industry dominates them all – manufacturing. Manufacturing accounts for
25 percent of the region’s wages, by far the largest proportion in New Hampshire and nearly
twice the statewide figure. The state’s top four defense contract companies are located here.
What is New Hampshire? 2014 Edition
71
The concentration of high-tech manufacturing
jobs helps boost the region’s incomes.
Average weekly wages here are the highest in
the state at $1,100. Property value per acre of
$132,000 is the highest of any region and
nearly five times the state average.
Health care plays a smaller role in the
economy in Greater Nashua than in any other
region.
Despite the region’s varied economy, more than 30 percent of Greater Nashua’s residents
commute to out-of-state jobs. This underscores the region’s close economic ties to the Boston
market. It also illustrates the focus here on improving and expanding transportation networks,
including the expansion of Interstate 93 and the extension of commuter rail lines from Lowell to
Nashua, and beyond.
Appendix
What is NH? 2014 Edition
Great North White Mountains
Woods
Region
Lakes
Region
Page 1 of 5
Dartmouth/Lake
Sunapee Monadnock Seacoast Greater
Greater
Region
Region
Region Concord Manchester
Greater Total New
Nashua Hampshire
Population Estimate 2013
26,754
50,812
130,295
100,292
119,858
294,648
93,445
263,910
243,445
1,323,459
Population 2010
27,642
51,092
130,461
100,207
120,146
290,712
93,557
261,262
241,391
1,316,470
Population 2000
27,825
45,961
121,766
92,955
113,371
267,777
88,012
248,838
229,281
1,235,786
Percent Change
-0.7%
11.2%
7.1%
7.8%
6.0%
8.6%
6.3%
5.0%
5.3%
6.5%
Population Under Age 18 2010
5,292
9,829
26,064
19,741
24,909
61,550
20,497
61,313
58,039
287,234
309,562
Population Under Age 18 2000
6,405
10,541
28,683
20,813
28,051
64,271
22,180
66,405
62,213
Percent Change
-17.4%
-6.8%
-9.1%
-5.2%
-11.2%
-4.2%
-7.6%
-7.7%
-6.7%
-7.2%
Housing Units 2010
17,724
38,456
83,435
48,953
54,984
128,483
39,136
106,829
96,754
614,754
Housing Units 2000
16,320
33,156
72,394
43,253
49,436
113,968
34,912
96,510
87,075
547,024
8.6%
16.0%
15.3%
13.2%
11.2%
12.7%
12.1%
10.7%
11.1%
12.4%
Hispanic/Latino Any Race 2010
360
560
1,574
1,688
1,691
4,922
1,523
11,936
12,450
36,704
Hispanic/Latino Any Race 2000
181
270
919
876
827
2,616
884
6,695
7,221
20,489
Land Area 2010 (Square Miles)
1,382
1,801
1,283
1,247
1,251
773
424
480
312
8,953
Percent Change
Change from 2000 to 2010 in:
Population
-183
5,131
8,695
7,252
6,775
22,935
5,545
12,424
12,110
80,684
-1,113
-712
-2,619
-1,072
-3,142
-2,721
-1,683
-5,092
-4,174
-22,328
1,404
5,300
11,041
5,700
5,548
14,515
4,224
10,319
9,679
67,730
179
290
655
812
864
2,306
639
5,241
5,229
16,215
Population
2.1%
3.9%
9.9%
7.6%
9.1%
22.1%
7.1%
19.8%
18.3%
100.0%
Population Under Age 18
1.8%
3.4%
9.1%
6.9%
8.7%
21.4%
7.1%
21.3%
20.2%
100.0%
Housing Units
2.9%
6.3%
13.6%
8.0%
8.9%
20.9%
6.4%
17.4%
15.7%
100.0%
Population Under Age 18
Housing Units
Hispanic
In 2010 Percent of NH's:
Hispanic
Land Area
2010 People per Square Mile
Seasonal Homes as % of Total
1.0%
1.5%
4.3%
4.6%
4.6%
13.4%
4.1%
32.5%
33.9%
100.0%
15.4%
20.1%
14.3%
13.9%
14.0%
8.6%
4.7%
5.4%
3.5%
100.0%
20.0
28.4
101.6
80.4
96.1
375.9
220.6
544.7
773.2
147.0
23.2%
36.4%
31.4%
11.6%
8.8%
5.2%
1.4%
0.9%
1.2%
10.5%
New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies
Appendix
What is NH? 2014 Edition
Great North White Mountains
Woods
Region
Population Born in Another State (%)
Population Foreign Born (%)
Total Non-Native NH Population
Lakes
Region
Page 2 of 5
Dartmouth/Lake
Sunapee Monadnock Seacoast Greater
Greater
Region
Region
Region Concord Manchester
Greater Total New
Nashua Hampshire
33.3%
47.7%
47.9%
50.2%
52.4%
56.9%
41.7%
45.6%
59.9%
2.7%
3.8%
3.0%
4.9%
2.9%
4.1%
3.9%
7.3%
8.2%
51.5%
5.3%
36.0%
51.5%
50.9%
55.1%
55.4%
61.0%
45.6%
52.9%
68.2%
56.8%
Population Age 65 and Over
20.1%
17.8%
17.0%
16.4%
14.9%
13.6%
13.1%
11.0%
11.9%
13.7%
Population Under Age 18
19.1%
19.2%
20.0%
19.7%
20.7%
21.2%
21.9%
23.5%
24.0%
21.8%
50.3
47.7
46.0
45.0
43.8
42.5
42.0
40.0
41.2
44.7
Median Age
Economic Data for 2013
Labor Force
10,090
31,120
51,310
48,400
54,200
187,390
70,480
107,870
167,560
742,070
9,370
29,520
48,710
46,440
51,410
176,770
67,010
102,350
158,310
702,970
Unemployment
720
1,600
2,600
1,960
2,790
10,620
3,470
5,520
9,250
39,100
Rate
7.1
5.1
5.1
4.0
5.1
5.7
4.9
5.1
5.5
5.3
Employment in Households
Establishments (2012)
633
2,140
3,304
2,725
2,663
10,269
3,672
7,575
5,733
44,804
7,833
25,883
40,953
47,149
40,278
151,239
58,755
122,762
93,892
612,432
$625.71
$629.61
$702.40
$1,014.65
$794.33
$897.70
$858.51
$933.67 $1,106.65
$928.33
Labor Force
1.4%
4.2%
6.9%
6.5%
7.3%
25.3%
9.5%
14.5%
22.6%
100.0%
Employment in Households
1.3%
4.2%
6.9%
6.6%
7.3%
25.1%
9.5%
14.6%
22.5%
100.0%
Unemployment
1.8%
4.1%
6.6%
5.0%
7.1%
27.2%
8.9%
14.1%
23.7%
100.0%
Establishments (2012)
1.4%
4.8%
7.4%
6.1%
5.9%
22.9%
8.2%
16.9%
12.8%
100.0%
Employment in Establishments (2012)
1.3%
4.2%
6.7%
7.7%
6.6%
24.7%
9.6%
20.0%
15.3%
100.0%
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Employment in Establishments (2012)
Average Weekly Wage (2012)
In 2013 Percent of NH's:
LQ BASED ON NH
Total, Private plus Government
Construction
1.9
1.1
1.3
0.6
1.4
0.8
0.9
1.2
0.8
1.0
Manufacturing
0.7
0.7
1.0
1.1
1.4
0.9
0.7
0.9
1.7
1.0
Wholesale Trade
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.8
0.8
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.0
Retail Trade
1.0
1.3
1.1
0.9
0.9
1.2
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.0
Transportation and Warehousing
1.1
0.8
0.7
0.5
1.1
0.9
0.8
1.6
0.9
1.0
Information
0.0
0.6
0.5
0.7
0.8
1.3
0.3
1.4
1.0
1.0
Finance and Insurance
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.9
1.3
0.9
1.0
1.4
1.0
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
0.5
1.0
1.0
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.8
1.5
1.0
1.0
New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies
Appendix
What is NH? 2014 Edition
Great North White Mountains
Woods
Region
Lakes
Region
Page 3 of 5
Dartmouth/Lake
Sunapee Monadnock Seacoast Greater
Greater
Region
Region
Region Concord Manchester
Greater Total New
Nashua Hampshire
Professional and Technical Service
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.4
1.0
0.8
1.1
1.2
1.0
Management of Companies/Enterprises
0.0
0.2
0.8
0.0
2.1
0.7
0.5
1.5
0.9
1.0
Administrative and Waste Services
0.3
0.3
0.8
0.6
0.6
1.2
0.6
1.2
1.0
1.0
Educational Services
0.1
0.3
0.9
0.0
0.9
0.6
0.8
1.1
0.5
1.0
Health Care and Social Assistance
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.6
1.1
0.9
1.2
1.0
0.8
1.0
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
0.4
2.4
1.4
1.0
0.7
1.2
0.9
0.6
0.7
1.0
Accommodation and Food Services
1.3
2.0
1.4
0.8
0.8
1.1
0.7
0.9
0.8
1.0
Other Services Except Public Admin
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.7
1.3
0.9
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.0
Total Government
1.8
1.1
1.3
0.8
1.1
1.0
1.8
0.8
0.7
1.0
100.0%
PERCENT OF TOTAL WAGES
Total, Private plus Government
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Construction
9.4%
5.3%
6.4%
2.0%
5.9%
3.3%
3.9%
5.0%
2.6%
3.9%
Manufacturing
9.5%
9.3%
14.6%
13.9%
18.2%
12.8%
8.4%
11.6%
25.1%
14.2%
Wholesale Trade
2.0%
2.3%
2.9%
3.3%
4.9%
5.8%
6.5%
6.6%
6.7%
7.3%
11.7%
16.6%
11.8%
6.6%
9.6%
10.1%
7.9%
9.0%
8.5%
8.9%
Transportation and Warehousing
1.9%
1.6%
1.1%
0.6%
1.9%
1.3%
1.4%
2.9%
1.2%
1.6%
Information
0.0%
1.7%
1.0%
1.9%
1.7%
4.2%
0.8%
4.3%
3.4%
3.1%
Finance and Insurance
2.0%
3.8%
2.8%
3.0%
6.1%
9.8%
6.4%
7.0%
12.8%
7.9%
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
0.6%
1.0%
1.0%
0.5%
0.7%
0.9%
0.9%
1.5%
1.1%
1.0%
Professional and Technical Service
1.0%
2.9%
5.2%
7.0%
3.8%
7.3%
6.6%
9.1%
9.8%
8.2%
Management of Companies/Enterprises
0.0%
0.5%
1.8%
0.0%
6.4%
4.0%
1.4%
2.6%
1.6%
2.7%
Administrative and Waste Services
1.0%
1.6%
3.3%
1.9%
2.7%
5.9%
2.2%
4.1%
3.7%
4.3%
Educational Services
0.5%
0.7%
2.6%
0.0%
2.3%
1.4%
2.1%
2.6%
0.8%
3.0%
20.7%
17.7%
16.2%
27.2%
14.5%
12.2%
17.7%
14.7%
8.9%
14.0%
Retail Trade
Health Care and Social Assistance
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
0.4%
2.6%
1.6%
0.6%
0.8%
0.9%
0.6%
0.5%
0.4%
0.7%
Accommodation and Food Services
5.1%
10.0%
6.0%
2.7%
2.9%
3.5%
2.4%
2.7%
2.2%
3.2%
Other Services Except Public Admin
Total Government
1.6%
2.0%
2.3%
1.2%
2.6%
1.8%
3.3%
2.8%
1.7%
2.1%
27.8%
16.8%
17.9%
8.5%
14.3%
13.0%
26.3%
12.1%
9.2%
13.0%
5.9%
7.0%
3.4%
10.0%
13.4%
19.0%
4.1%
12.6%
30.9%
15.6%
$51,058
$62,475
$67,629
$77,105
$74,511
$87,596
$80,712
$85,658
$96,379
$82,346
Journey to Work
% of Workers Commuting to Out of State Jobs
Income
Average Household Income (2008-2012)
New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies
Appendix
What is NH? 2014 Edition
Great North White Mountains
Woods
Region
Percent of Persons in Poverty (2008-2012)
Lakes
Region
Page 4 of 5
Dartmouth/Lake
Sunapee Monadnock Seacoast Greater
Greater
Region
Region
Region Concord Manchester
Greater Total New
Nashua Hampshire
13.5%
11.4%
11.7%
9.1%
9.6%
8.4%
8.3%
8.2%
5.6%
8.6%
% of the Adult Population with a Bachelor's Degree or Higher
14.3%
27.7%
28.1%
38.8%
31.3%
36.6%
34.6%
32.0%
38.2%
33.9%
Per Capita Spending on K-12 Education
$2,238
$2,682
$2,257
$2,497
$2,274
$2,189
$2,236
$2,055
$2,305
$2,244
2013 Property Tax Rate (Average)
$20.60
$16.59
$17.62
$22.33
$24.50
$22.42
$26.34
$23.43
$24.23
$21.45
2013 Property Value per Acre
$2,511
$7,527
$28,119
$16,414
$14,135
$74,014
$32,111
$79,631 $131,866
$26,955
$171,120 $178,255
$130,540
$94,487 $124,454
$93,239
$92,705 $108,337
$116,960
Education
2013 Property Value per Person
$83,397
Government & Politics - 2012
Democrats
4,717
8,325
21,363
20,902
24,138
62,441
19,663
46,693
42,116
Percent
29.6%
24.0%
22.6%
29.9%
28.8%
29.6%
30.1%
27.5%
26.1%
27.6%
4,209
10,706
32,232
17,446
22,305
59,840
19,643
57,381
49,913
273,675
Republicans
250,358
Percent
26.5%
30.9%
34.2%
24.9%
26.6%
28.4%
30.1%
33.8%
30.9%
30.2%
Undeclared
6,984
15,637
40,770
31,596
37,369
88,466
26,017
65,675
69,410
381,924
Percent
43.9%
45.1%
43.2%
45.2%
44.6%
42.0%
39.8%
38.7%
43.0%
42.2%
Berlin
Conway
Laconia
Claremont
Keene Rochester Concord Manchester
Nashua
9,964
10,096
16,016
13,293
23,399
29,992
42,815
110,040
86,870
140.5
445.7
374.6
293.4
260.7
250.1
214.9
567.1
234.8
187.9
1,696.1
4,338.4
4,458.0
3,588.4
3,551.4
3,647.6
2,970.9
3,496.9
2,717.9
2,324.0
$345
$322
$395
$327
$279
$380
$401
$397
$457
$384
Criminal Justice and Families
Largest City/Town in Area
2012 Population
Violent Crime Rate in Largest Town/City
Property Crime Rate in Largest Town/City
Town Spending on Police/Fire (per Person)
1,320,718
Health Care
Town Spending on Health/Welfare (per Person)
Hospital Admissions per 1,000 Persons (2008)
Number of Beds in Area Hospitals (per 100K Persons)
$37
$27
$36
$26
$31
$22
$22
$21
$17
$24
103.4
113.6
61.8
230.2
57.8
92.3
112.7
92.2
98.9
100.6
239
196
141
452
148
214
250
236
233
229
$56,380
$56,802
$54,105
$72,494
$49,938
$66,933
$64,386
$60,065
$64,603
$64,566
20.7%
17.7%
16.2%
27.2%
14.5%
12.2%
17.7%
14.7%
8.9%
14.0%
Percent of Land Acres Held in Current Use (2013)
72.3%
27.6%
53.3%
69.3%
67.0%
42.5%
52.9%
35.1%
23.0%
52.2%
Percent of Land in Current Use that is Forest (2013)
23.3%
63.7%
64.1%
56.7%
62.3%
56.6%
62.8%
68.9%
60.8%
53.2%
Hospital Payroll per Employee
Healthcare Wages as Percent of Total Wages
Environment and Sustainability
Defining Geography
New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies
Appendix
What is NH? 2014 Edition
Great North White Mountains
Woods
Region
Lakes
Region
Page 5 of 5
Dartmouth/Lake
Sunapee Monadnock Seacoast Greater
Greater
Region
Region
Region Concord Manchester
Greater Total New
Nashua Hampshire
Non-profits
25.2%
59.7%
12.8%
9.0%
11.9%
9.7%
11.3%
10.4%
8.1%
22.8%
Charitable Giving per Taxpayer (2012 Tax Year - IRS Zipcode)
$1,735
Percent of Town Property Exempt from Property Tax
$2,535
$2,686
$3,800
$2,625
$2,312
$2,816
$2,467
$2,443
$2,860
0.4%
2.6%
1.6%
0.6%
0.8%
0.9%
0.6%
0.5%
0.4%
0.7%
0
339
384
629
602
4,004
396
3,393
1,924
12,046
Arts and media
Arts, Recreation Wages as % of Total
Information Employment
Information Wages as % of Total
Accommodation Employment
Accommodation Wages as % of Total
0.0%
1.7%
1.0%
1.9%
1.7%
4.2%
0.8%
4.3%
3.4%
3.1%
873
5,049
5,012
3,386
2,972
14,503
3,619
9,570
6,899
53,293
5.1%
10.0%
6.0%
2.7%
2.9%
3.5%
6.2%
7.8%
7.3%
3.2%
New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies
Want to know more?
-- Become a subscriber.
The NH Center for Public Policy Studies needs you.
Since 1996 the Center has delivered to New Hampshire’s policy makers, news organizations,
and citizens objective analysis that has become the foundation for better public policy. The
Center gets no state or federal appropriation. We have survived and flourished because of the
extraordinary generosity of the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation and a growing list of
private donors. To maintain our independence, we need to broaden our base of contributors.
Our goal: 100 new contributors, each donating $1,000 for an annual subscription to our research
reports and an invitation to our policy forums.
Our guarantee: Even if you don’t subscribe, you can get our reports for free. You can download
them from our website or call and we’ll mail you copies. For free. That’s our mission: “to raise
new ideas and improve policy debates through quality information and analysis on issues
shaping New Hampshire’s future,” and to do so in ways that make the information available to
everyone: legislators, school boards, small-business owners, voters. As long as we can raise
enough unrestricted money to support our inquiry into problems that matter to New Hampshire,
we will keep making that information available at no cost to people who will use it.
Our independence: The Center is a private, nonpartisan, not-for-profit organization. Our board
of directors sets our research agenda. Unrestricted donations allow the Center to pursue topics
that grant-makers typically won’t support: local governance, school funding, and corrections.
The Center exists only because of the generosity of our donors.
To subscribe: Send a check to:
New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies
One Eagle Square, Suite 510
Concord, NH 03301
Please include your mailing address and your name as you would like it to appear in our list of
donors. Your donation is 100% tax deductible. For more information about the Center and its
work, call Steve Norton, Executive Director at (603) 226-2500 or email [email protected].
Our Supporters
The Center’s continued service to New Hampshire is possible because of the generous unrestricted donations made
by the following individuals, organizations, and corporations. The Center’s supporters do not necessarily endorse,
nor has the Center asked them to endorse, any of the findings or recommendations in our work.
Sustaining Benefactors - $20,000 & over
Endowment for Health
New Hampshire Charitable Foundation
Benefactors - $10,000 - $19,999
Dorothy & Paul Hobbs NH Fund*
Putnam Foundation
Harold Janeway
Major Donors - $5,000 - $9,999
Anagnost Investments, Inc.
Lovett-Woodsum Foundation
Hitchiner Manufacturing Co.
Donors - $2,500 - $4,999
Anthem BC/BS
Elliot Hospital
Woolsey & Bea Conover*
People’s United Bank
Subscribers - $1,000 - $2,499
James & Ellen Adams Bassett
Geoffrey E. & Martha Fuller Clark
Couch Family Foundation
Bill & Sue Dunlap
Fidelity Investments
Douglas Hall
Eric Herr
Hoffman Family Foundation
Lavallee/Brensinger Architects Fund*
Ledyard National Bank
NH Association of Insurance Agents
Merrimack County Savings Bank
James & Judy Putnam
Mike Smith
Paul Spiess
University of New Hampshire
Jack and Pat Weeks Fund*
Dan & Beverly Wolf
Citizens Bank – NH
John Garvey & Cotton Cleveland
Harte Crow
Steve Duprey
Martin Gross
Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare
David W. Hess
Lake Sunapee Bank
Leadership New Hampshire
Andy Lietz
Northeast Delta Dental
Dan Prior & Judith Varsanyi
Rick & Linda Roesch
Southern New Hampshire University
Unitil
Fred Upton
Michael Whitney
Kimon and Anne Zachos*
* An Advised Fund within the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation
Friends – under $1,000
Alexander Eastman Foundation
David Alukonis
Bank of New Hampshire
John Beardmore
Peter Bergh & Janet Prince
Thomas & Emilie Burack
Whit & Closey Dickey*
Jane Difley
John & Patricia Dunn
Lewis Feldstein
Grubb & Ellis|Northern New England
Kenneth & Brenda Johnson
Manchester Community College
Monadnock Board of Realtors
Arthur Mudge
NH Distributors, Inc.
NH School Administrators Association
John & Alice Pepper
Public Service of NH
Regency Mortgage Corporation
St. Mary’s Bank
Todd Selig
Sheehan Phinney Capitol Group
Speare Memorial Hospital
Maynard & Laura Thomson
Brian Walsh & Linda Patchett
Mark & Susan Zankel
* An Advised Fund within the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation
Margaret Allen
John B. & Sharon B. Andrews
Sherwood Bain
Bellavance Beverage Company
John Blackford
Claremont Savings Bank
Werner E. Dietrich
Diversity Workforce Coalition
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston
Sheila T. Francoeur
Alphonse Haettenschwiller
William & Erika Johnson
Dianne M. Mercier
Chuck Morse
NH Bankers Association
NH Housing Finance Authority
Richard & Elizabethanne Ober
Plymouth Area Democrats
Charlotte Quimby
David & Mary Ruedig
Margaret Selig
Sheehan Phinney Bass + Green, P.A.
Donald Shumway
John & Donna Sytek
Paul & Paula Trombi
Scott Workman
New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies
Become a supporter or renew your support today!
Unrestricted donations from supporters like you make it possible for the Center to conduct analyses on a
broad range of issues such as health care, education, corrections, and state budget trends.
Your tax-deductable contribution in any amount will allow the Center to continue its work to inform and
improve public policy in New Hampshire.
►Make a donation:
$20,000+ Sustaining Benefactor
$ 5,000 - $9,999 Major Donor
$ 1,000 - $2,499 Subscriber
$10,000 - $19,999 Benefactor
$ 2,500 - $4,999 Donor
Under $1,000 Friend
Multi-year commitments allow us to plan for longer term projects.
Today’s Date:__________________
►Make a pledge:
My pledge total: $_____________________ will be fulfilled as follows:
Year 1: $ _____________
Your signature:
Year 2: $ ______________Year 3: $ ______________
_______________________________________________
►Name___________________________________________________________________
Address_________________________________________________________________
Town, State, ZIP__________________________________________________________
Telephone_______________________ E-mail_________________________________
In the Center’s listing of supporters, please acknowledge this donation as follows:
Name___________________________________________________________________
____I wish to remain anonymous.
►As a sponsor of the Center’s work, I would like:




E-mail notices (via our newsletter) on the Center’s work
E-mail notification when the Center releases a new report
Mailed copy of each report when published
Invitations to Center- sponsored presentations & events
Please make checks payable to New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies and mail them to:
One Eagle Square, Suite 510, Concord NH 03301.
Online Donations: Now you have a safe and convenient way to lend your support to the Center's work.
We invite you to visit our website at www.nhpolicy.org and click on the gold "Donate" button.
All contributions are 100 percent tax deductible. Contact us if you have any questions, special
requests, or suggestions.
How did you hear about us? Let us know by emailing us at [email protected]
William H. Dunlap,
Chair
David J. Alukonis
Martin L. Gross
Eric Herr
Dianne Mercier
James Putnam
Todd I. Selig
Michael C. Whitney
Daniel H. Wolf
Directors Emeritus
Sheila T. Francoeur
Stuart V. Smith, Jr.
Donna Sytek
Brian F. Walsh
Kimon S. Zachos