The 100 best places to raise a family

[lcm2007ms]

They put Beaumont second to last.

 

http://www.today.com/id/24713234/ns/today-today_101/t/best-places-raise-family/#.Ueb7POko6Uk

[JJWooten]

They put Beaumont second to last.

 

http://www.today.com/id/24713234/ns/today-today_101/t/best-places-raise-family/#.Ueb7POko6Uk

 

Hope no one is surprised. I'm pretty sure there is a new study every month that ranks Beaumont as one of the worst cities in XXXXXX category.

 

The real question is what the city/county are doing to improve their image.

[LUSportsFan]

Not disputing that improvement is needed.

 

It would be nice to see a little detail. The listing mentions long standing air quality problems, but they are not even close to the problems #12 best Los Angeles or not listed Houston-Baytown-Huntsville. High Ozone days for LA 121.5. High Ozone days for Beaumont 10.7.

 

This type of report provides no actionable information in its present form. Apparently there was some analysis of data from numerous sources, but the article provides no breakdown. For all I know, someone pulled numbers out of the air. Other articles actually provide summarized breakdowns that might actually be useful.

 

I can't dispute the results because I don't have any useful information supporting the results. Not saying it's not correct, but in the article's present form there is no way to say it is correct...just a bunch of numbers. Was the study performed in house with the publisher's staff or was a third party commissioned?

 

Wondering what caused towns like Columbia, SC and Springfield, MO to make the worst list.

 

_----------------_----------------------

 

Just for fun I googled worst cities. #12 best Los Angeles was in the 10 Worst on another study and was 8th best the year before. Such drastic fluctuations show that this type of article is useless. I hope there are studies conducted to determine weaknesses and strong points on a city by city basis, but the broadbrush approach is not very useful.

 

One interesting thing is that Rodale.com, the linked report's originator, has offices in Los Angeles. On a separate report, LA is one of the 10 worst. On the linked report, (the report Rodale prepared) they are #12 best. No repeatability; no or greatly degraded validity.

 

Sent from my Android device using Tapatalk 2

 

[Big T]

This was five years ago.

[LUSportsFan]

This was five years ago.

 

Thanks for pointing that out.

 

Just thinking back, the area has had to cope with a lot of issues, both economic and natural. I think some of the area's problems may be self-inflicted, but not all.

 

Mother Nature not cooperating

 

September 1, 2005 - Hurricane Rita hits

 

Below is a link to a large PowerPoint file (14.5 meg) prepared by Dr. Richard Bothel, but it has some great pictures of damage to the University included in case we have forgotten. It contains pictures I have not seen before. (I found the PowerPoint via an internet search.) The presentation is restricted to Lamar University, but it could be extended to the total area. For example, the homes of my mother, brother & his wife, sister, neice as well as the family camp house all had significant damage due to Rita. Luckily, my family had insurance and funds to make the repairs. Others in the area weren't in the same position.

 

I think Rita still had some impacts to the area when the report was made based on the fact that my church (located in west Houston) was sending crews several weekends a year to the Triangle to help with repairs until after Hurricane Ike hit the Gulf Coast (Sept 1, 2008) about three months after the subject rating was published.

 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=45&ved=0CEUQFjAEOCg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbothel.com%2Fideas%2FACHE042406.ppt&ei=_0DoUfHHEYH48gTLyYHoBw&usg=AFQjCNEOIcTmj4NfjWcwahR3_0EfpMEiuQ&bvm=bv.49478099,d.aWM&cad=rja

 

Video of Rita's Track

http://www.nasa.gov/mpg/134838main_ritaPause_rainAccum_320x240.mpg

 

Sep 12, 2007 - Hurricane Humberto

 

(I forgot about this one.) Hurricane Humberto hit the area in September, 2007. Damage wasn't as bad as that of Rita, but it was still a set back. Lucky for the Texas side, it veered into southwest Louisiana. The Triangle received the "dry side" of the storm.(Sept 12, 2007 was 8 1/2 months before the subject rating was published.)

 

http://www.chron.com/news/hurricanes/article/Victims-of-Humberto-assess-damage-1797752.php

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/20742710/ns/weather/t/instant-hurricane-humberto-sneaks-gulf/#.UehRWcU25TM

 

September 12, 2008 - Hurricane Ike

Family had some more damage to their homes with this one. They evacuated to Fort Worth. It has been awhile, but my mom, sister, brother, nephew, niece evacuated. My mom and sister spent 2-3 weeks in a motel in Fort Worth. My brother came back a little earlier than them due to ongoing business in the area and to check on progress at the various family homes. (Living in west Houston, I didn't have it so bad. Never lost power. Never lost internet. Never lost AT&T UVerse. We just lost our fence. We "hunkered down" as our public officials requested.)

 

http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/photos/article/Revisiting-Hurricane-Ike-701690.php#photo-364087

 

 

 

 

[JJWooten]

Again, though, the study is based on:

 

They want to raise their children somewhere safe, where they can attend good schools with favorable student-teacher ratios, above-average test scores and respectable budgets. Plenty of museums, parks and pediatricians also contribute to a good quality of life, whereas multihour commutes, expensive houses and divorcing friends and neighbors do no

 

All of which aren't exactly the best in Beaumont.

[LUSportsFan]

Again, though, the study is based on:

 

They want to raise their children somewhere safe, where they can attend good schools with favorable student-teacher ratios, above-average test scores and respectable budgets. Plenty of museums, parks and pediatricians also contribute to a good quality of life, whereas multihour commutes, expensive houses and divorcing friends and neighbors do no

 

All of which aren't exactly the best in Beaumont.

 

That's fine, but I can't tell if those are the things the "study" was looking at. I found no methodology nor data sources for the linked article. Additionally, as Big T pointed out, the report was dated 5/20/2008.

 

It looks like the Beaumont Enterprise finally figured out that the subject "study" was over five years old. They've removed the link from their website. It was showing up as one of the most active links this morning.

 

http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/article/List-names-Beaumont-second-worst-place-to-raise-a-4670753.php

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Back to my belief that these "studies" are garbage; particularly if they don't provide the methodology nor the sources used...

 

I'm not saying that the area is perfect. In my opinion, there are a lot of things that need improvement. What I tried to say initially is that the webpage originally linked provided little or no useful information. It was too broad. There are tons of studies with varying results. In one study, a city is one of the "Greats". In another study, the same city is one of the "Worst". Without repeatability for at least the majority of the references, the information should be ignored. Realizing that the study was dated (as Big T pointed out), I then tried to see if there might have been contributing factors that led to the 2008 ranking. That's what led me to look for things that might have been an underlying cause of the low rating in 2008. The common thread was natural disasters that disrupted the area. The disasters disrupted schools; they disrupted places of employment; in some cases they uprooted people. We still have teams from our church going over to the Triangle to do repairs. That would tell me that things aren't totally up to full steam yet.

 

(I haven't been able to find Beaumont listed as a "Worst Place to Raise Children" on any other webpage.) What I did find is that the results of the subject "study" don't compare with anything I've looked up so far.

 

Let's compare some of the great places in the subject report to something a little more current.

 

#12 Greatest - Los Angeles, CA in 5/2008 to #9 Worst in 10/2011

 

"Dirty, expensive, public schools rank as some of the worst in the nation. Sure, there are pockets of charm, but it'll cost you."

 

#32 Greatest - Las Vegas, NV 5/2008 to #6 Worst in 10/2011

 

"Baby, Las Vegas is no place for a baby. Hit hard by the recession, cuts to schools and a considerable unemployment rate keep Sin City off the list of greats."

 

http://www.babble.com/mom/10-worst-u-s-cities-for-raising-children/

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

If that's not sufficient, let's compare two "studies" in the same year. The subject "study" was reported on 5/20/2008. Another "10 Worst" from another source was reported in 11/2008. The 11/2008 ranking at least provided some discussion about the methodology although there was no breakdown of the results. The differences in the two are striking and raise questions about the validity of either. It's almost like one or both may have just thrown darts at a board to make their picks.

 

 

#12 Greatest - Los Angeles, CA from 5/2008 to #10 Worst in 11/2008"

 

"With the second highest cost of living, only one playground per 10,000 residents, and a meager graduation rate, it's no surprise that the City of Angels completes the top 10 worst cities for children."

 

#23 Greatest - New York NY from 5/2008 to #6 Worst in 11/2008

 

"It may come as a surprise to some, but New York City is actually the safest place on our list. However, its exorbitant cost of living and meager graduation rate (less than 40 percent) still make it a bad place to raise children."

 

#27 Greatest - Baltimore, MD from 5/2008 to #3 Worst in 11/2008

 

"With merely 38.5 percent of its students completing high school, Baltimore's graduation rate is second only to Detroit's. Its high crime rates make it an even less desirable place to raise children."

 

http://www.qualityhealth.com/childrens-health-and-parenting-articles/10-worst-cities-raise-family

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Here's another study, Parenting Magazine's 2012 list of 10 Best Places to Raise a Family. Methodology is actually given for this one.

 

#86 Greatest - Washington, DC in 5/2008 to #6 in 2012

 

Only Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN and Madison, WI repeat in the two studies. Austin is #14 in the subject 5/2008 study and is #4 in the 2012 study.

 

http://www.parenting.com/2012-best-cities-families

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's one that I personally think is a little more useful, the Money Magazine Best Places to Live Comparison. This study has the parameters that JJWooten mentioned. The comparision is broken down by each one of the data points. The ranking is prepared annually and is well known. In fact, Beaumont actually ended up as one of the top 10 cities in the country in the late '70's...before the Energy Bust.

 

The site provides the ability to select cities from a list to compare. You can get a pretty good look at how you compare with others; where you are better; and where you need work. I added several Texas cities to the list in addition to the 2012 Money Magazine's Top 10.

 

I set the page up for 2012, but I believe other years can be compared.

 

http://apps.money.cnn.com/bestplaces_2012/compare_tool_2012.jsp?id=PL4807000,PL4835000,PL4817000,PL4819000,PL4819972,PL4845000,PL4806128,PL4856000,PL4876000,&view=c

 

A few observations. The Museums count is restricted to those museums associated with the American Alliance of Museums. Of the numerous museums in Beaumont, only the Art Museum of Southeast Texas and the McFaddin-Ward Home are listed. That means the Texas Energy Museum, the Texas Fire Museum, the Edison Museum, the Clifton Steamboat Museum, the Dishman Art Museum, the Spindletop Boomtown Museum, the French Trading Post, and several others are not counted. The criteria is within 30 miles, so if Beaumont already has two museums who are associated with the AAM, then the Museum of the Gulf Coast (Port Arthur), the Stark Art Museum and Stark House (Orange) and Shangri-la Gardens (Orange) are not included. Nor are the museums in mid-county. There are actually a lot of museums in the area and a lot that are very good and comparable to other areas. There are other things that need to be worked on, but access to museums is not one of them. Education of the opportunities might be needed, but the museums are in place. If Beaumont got all of its museums to join the American Alliance of Museums, the Quality of Life number would increase. Even now, the city doesn't compare too badly with Houston in that category. Beaumont shows 2 museums (85.9 sq miles) vs Houston's 6 museums (627 sq miles).

 

Comparing other data points is also misleading. For example, it looks like the movie theatres are raw numbers. There is no adjustment for theatres like number of theatres per sq miles, etc. Without an adjustment like that, it is difficult to make comparisons unless each municipality has a similar geographic footprint.

 

I just did an eyeball look at the cities that I selected, and Beaumont compares favorably to the other cities in several categories.

[JJWooten]

And my statement still holds. Instead of cutting down every study that list Beaumont as the worst XXXXXX, the city (and it's residents) need to stop bashing the study and starting realizing the common thread is Beaumont in the bottom.

[LUSportsFan]

I only cut down one study. I provided others that actually explained the process. Not trying to hide anything. I just can't stand junk.

 

There are issues that need to be worked, but that's true a lot of places. I think no one thinks nothing needs to be done. If you look at the last link, you would see that almost every Texas city that I selected has similar issues.

 

As I have stated before, my gripe is how shoddy the report is. I don't have any problem with comparative studies as long as the report actually provides timely information (this one was over five years old) and provides enough information to be useful. The linked report in the original post does neither. I guess that opinion is a result of working as a financial analyst most of my career. Reports and studies were my "bread and butter".

 

On the other hand, the Money Magazine report is current, it breaks the results into useful components, and provides methodology and data sources.

 

---------------------------------------------------------

 

Beaumont actually had better testing results than several cities. Does that mean nothing else needs to be done? No. It does tell me that poor education results are not a problem unique to the area. I would hope the goal would be to move to top 10 rates.

 

Crime rate was at a comparable rate as that of several other Texas cities, but it can still be improved and needs to be improved.

 

Houston is doing a good job of creating jobs either via new businesses or businesses from other areas (ex: Chevron moving headquarters from California. BP moving positions in Chicago to Houston). Based on the Money Magazine results, jobs are improving in the local area, but I would like to see more or some diversification. I would like to see some population growth. The area has stagnated since the 1950's and 1960's.

 

Home prices compare favorably with other Texas cities. That's a plus.

 

Time spent traveling back and forth to work is a lot better than in some areas. That's one thing I missed after my transfer to Houston. It gets old getting up at 4:15 am to leave to work so you can avoid the traffic. That's fairly common here in Houston. That's how the 23 minute commute is achieved for many of us; especially before the Katy Freeway project. Otherwise, the commute could be 45 minutes to one hour to go 20 miles on a good day.

 

Median income is comparable. Job growth hasn't been as robust as other parts of the state. I would like to see more entrepreneurs. There is too much dependency on the energy business (and that is what kept food on the table for me).

 

 

 

Sent from my Android device using Tapatalk 2

 

[coachacola]

Having lived in four different states and mostly large metro areas (Houston, Austin, Denver, Los Angeles), I find these best of/worst of studies useless. IMHO, what's more important (in no particular order) is how much you make relative to the cost of living in the area, if you like the weather or not, how well you fit in to the area, which part of area you actually live in, you're age and family status, are your friends and family nearby (and do you make new friends easily), and in general what stage of life you're in.

 

You can get a general idea what an area is like from these studies but they don't mean anything until you actually move and live there.

[lu cards]

these turds that like to gloat about stuff like this need to remember that lu has many fabulous communities within 15 minutes of campus.port neches,groves,bridge city,hf,lumberton,nederland,vidor,lcm,orangefield,silsbee,hj and many more.beaumont also has 2 highly regarded private schools(KELLY,LEGACY)that probably don't factor in to this report.i think the west end of Beaumont is nice and this report is full of shit.

[Guest NorthoftheBorder]

All studies are biased and this one is no different! Just more fodder for Beaumont/LU haters like Wooten!!