The document provides a summary of demographic, economic, and labor market data for LaPorte County from 2000-2013/2014. Some key points: - The county's population grew modestly between 2000-2013 primarily due to natural increase, while domestic migration declined. - The population is aging and becoming more racially/ethnically diverse, with the Hispanic population nearly doubling. - Educational attainment among adults increased slightly but many still only have a high school degree. - The number of establishments doubled from 2000-2011, mostly due to new business formation. - The largest industries are manufacturing, government, and retail, though most lost jobs between 2002-2013 except food/ac

1. Data SnapShot Series 1.0
February 2015
DATA SNAPSHOT
LaPorte County

2. Table of contents
Introduction
01
Demography
02
Economy
03
Labor Market
04

3. Purpose
About LaPorte County
01
introduction

4. 4
Purpose
This document provides information
and data about LaPorte County that
can be used to guide local decision-
making activities.
The Data SnapShot showcases a variety
of demographic, economic and labor
market information that local leaders,
community organizations and others can
use to gain a better perspective on
current conditions and opportunities in
their county.
To strengthen the value and usability of
the information, we showcase the data
using a variety of visual tools, such as
charts, graphs and tables. In addition, we
offer key points about the data as a way
of assisting the user with the interpretation
of the information presented.
Finally, short takeaway messages are
offered at the end of each section in order
to highlight some of the more salient
findings.
Introduction
section 01

5. 5
About LaPorte County
Introduction
section 01
County Background
Established 1832
County
Seat
LaPorte
Area 613 sq. mi.
Neighboring
Counties
Berrien, MI
Jasper, IN
Porter, IN
St. Joseph, IN
Starke, IN

6. Population change
Population pyramids
Race
Ethnicity
Educational attainment
Takeaways
02
demograph
y

7. 7
110,106
111,467 111,281
112,471
Population change
Components of Population Change, 2000-
2013
TotalChange 948
Natural Increase 3,723
International Migration 1,000
Domestic Migration -3,131
The total population is
projected to increase by
1 percent between 2013
and 2020.
Demography
Sources: STATSIndiana, U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census, 2010 Decennial Census, 2013 Estimates, Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change
section 02
The total population increased by 1 percent between 2000
and 2013.The major contributor to that expansion was
natural increase (births minus deaths over that span of time)
with a net growth of over 3,700 persons.
Data on domestic migration (the difference between the
number of people moving out of the county versus moving
in) show that out-migration outpaced in-migration by more
than 3,100 people. On the other hand, international
migration had a net increase of 1,000, indicating that the
county experienced an influx of new people from outside the
U.S.
Total population
projections
2000 2010 2013 2020

8. 8
6.0%
6.4%
7.4%
7.2%
7.3%
7.6%
5.7%
2.9%
1.4%
5.9%
6.0%
5.5%
5.5%
6.3%
7.2%
6.0%
3.4%
2.5%
9 6 3 0 3 6 9
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80+
Percent of Total PopulationAgeCohort
6.9%
7.1%
7.1%
8.2%
8.5%
6.0%
3.6%
2.8%
1.1%
6.4%
6.5%
5.6%
6.7%
7.5%
5.8%
3.9%
3.8%
2.3%
9 6 3 0 3 6 9
0-9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80+
Percent of Total Population
AgeCohort
Population pyramids
Population pyramids are visual representations of the age distribution of the population by
gender.
While the male to female ratio of the population did not
change dramatically between 2000 and 2013, the
distribution of people across the various age categories did
change over the two periods of time.
Demography
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates
section 02
The percentage of people under 50 years old has decreased
for both males and females over the 2000-2013 period. In
addition, the number 50 years old and over now stands at
nearly 40,700 people (about 37 percent of the population, up
from 29 percent in 2000).
Male Female
20132000
Male Female

9. 9
White
86%
Other
14%
Black
Asian
Native
Two or
More Races
White
88%
Other
12%
Black
Asian
Native
Two or
More Races
Race
The number of non-White
residents in LaPorte County
increased by 2 percentage
points between 2000 and 2013.
While every race, other thanWhite,
experienced a numerical increase
since 2000, the population of Black
and those of Mixed Races gained the
most people, helping to expand the
population of Other Races from 12
percent to 14 percent of the total
population between 2000 and 2013.
Demography
Race Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates
section 02
2000
2013

10. 10
Ethnicity
Hispanics are individuals of any
race whose ancestry is from
Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba,
Spain, the Dominican Republic
or any other Spanish-speaking
Central or South American
country.
There were 3,416 Hispanics residing
in LaPorte County in 2000.This
figure expanded to 6,569 by 2013, a
92.3 percent increase.
As a result, Hispanics now make up
6 percent of the overall population
(versus 3 percent in 2000).
Demography
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 Annual Population Estimates
section 02
6%
3%
Hispanics - 2000
Hispanics - 2013

11. 11
No High
School, 19%
High School,
41%
Some
College,
20%
Associate's
Degree, 6%
Bachelor's
Degree or
More, 14%
Educational attainment
LaPorte County witnessed a 5
percent increase between 2000 and 2013
in the proportion of adults (25 and over)
with an associate’s, bachelor’s or
graduate degree.
The proportion of adults 25 years of age and
older with a high school education or more
improved from 81 percent in 2000 to 86
percent by 2013.
Residents with less than a high school
education fell by 5 percentage points and
those with some college education rose by 1
percentage point from 2000 to 2013.
The number of adults with a college degree
increased from 20 percent in 2000 to 25
percent in 2013.This was due to a 2 percent
increase in associate’s degrees and a 3
percent increase in adults with at least a
bachelor's degree.
Demography
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – 2000 Decennial Census and 2013 ACS
section 02
2000
2013
No High
School, 14%
High School,
40%
Some
College,
21%
Associate's
Degree, 8%
Bachelor's
Degree or
More, 17%

12. 12
Takeaways
The population of LaPorte County is expected to
grow modestly over the next few years, and if
past trends hold, that increase will be largely due
to natural increase (more births than deaths).
While LaPorte County’s population has been
growing over the 2000 to 2013 period, it has also
been aging.This suggests a need to take a hard
look at how the county can remain hospitable
and responsive to the needs of growing number
of people over 50. In addition, the county’s
domestic migration has declined by over 3,000,
suggesting that young individuals and those of
prime working age (30 to 39 and 40 to 49 years of
age) are moving out of the county at a faster pace
than they are moving in.
While the population remains largely white, the
growth of the Hispanic community is worthy of
note. As such, finding ways to address the needs
and opportunities of a diversifying population will
be important.
The educational attainment of adults 25 and over
has improved since 2000, but the number with a
high school education only continues to be high (at
40 percent). So, determining if this could be a
barrier to economic growth is worthy of examining.
LaPorte County may want to explore the mix
of services and amenities that will be vital to
retaining and attracting educated young
adults, including the availability of good
quality jobs.
Demography
section 02

13. Establishments
Industries
Occupations
Income and poverty
Takeaways
03
economy

14. 14
Establishments
Components of Change for Establishments
Total Change (2000-11) 2,144
Natural Change (births minus deaths) 2,043
Net Migration (number moving in
versus moving out of the county)
101
The number of establishments in LaPorte
County doubled between 2000 and 2011.
The rapid growth of establishments was largely due
to natural change.That is, 7,081 establishments
were launched in the county between 2000 and
2011, while 4,937 closed, resulting in a gain of 2,144
establishments.
Economy
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database
section 03
An establishment is a
physical business location.
Branches, standalones and
headquarters are all
considered types of
establishments.
Definition of Company
Stages
0 1
2 3
4
Self-
employed
2-9
employees
10-99
employees
100-499
employees
500+
employees
Note: The 2011 figures use 2012 data to include all gains and losses over the entire year. Establishment
information was calculated in-house and may differ slightly from publicly available data.

15. 15
Number of establishments by
stage/employment category
Economy
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database
section 03
2000 2011
Stage Establishments Proportion Establishments Proportion
Stage 0 1,294 24% 2,175 29%
Stage 1 2,994 56% 4,348 58%
Stage 2 925 17% 850 11%
Stage 3 79 1% 68 1%
Stage 4 13 0% 8 0%
Total 5,305 100% 7,449 100%
Note: The 2011 figures use 2012 data to include all gains and losses over the entire year.

16. 16
Number of jobs by stage/employment
category
Economy
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database
section 03
2000 2011
Stage Jobs Proportion Jobs Proportion
Stage 0 1,294 2% 2,175 4%
Stage 1 11,164 18% 13,607 24%
Stage 2 23,972 40% 22,641 39%
Stage 3 14,500 24% 12,630 22%
Stage 4 9,435 16% 6,845 12%
Total 60,365 100% 57,898 100%
Note: The 2011 figures use 2012 data to include all gains and losses over the entire year.

17. 17
Amount of sales (2011 dollars) by
stage/employment category
Economy
Source: National Establishment Time Series (NETS) – 2012 Database
section 03
2000 2011
Stage Sales Proportion Sales Proportion
Stage 0 $160,046,855 2% $146,378,224 3%
Stage 1 $1,670,192,872 21% $1,212,360,959 21%
Stage 2 $3,034,642,492 38% $2,086,169,167 37%
Stage 3 $2,001,047,378 25% $1,719,904,604 30%
Stage 4 $1,169,791,625 15% $535,943,906 9%
Total $8,035,721,221 100% $5,700,756,860 100%
Note: The 2011 figures use 2012 data to include all gains and losses over the entire year.

18. 18
Manufacturing
14.5%
Government
13.6%
Retail Trade
12.3%
Health Care &
Social Assistance
11.1%
Accommodation &
Food Services
8.0%
All Other
Industries
40.5%
Top five industries in 2013
59.5 percent of jobs are tied to
one of the top five industries in
LaPorte County.
Manufacturing is the largest industry
sector (7,756 jobs), followed by
government (7,262 jobs) and retail trade
(6,586 jobs).
Accommodation & Food Services is the
smallest of the top industry sectors with
4,272 jobs.
The top four industries all lost jobs
between 2002 and 2013. Only
Accommodation & Food Services
experienced job gains over the two
periods of time (12 percent growth).
Economy
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors
section 03

19. 19
Industry distribution and change
NAICS
Code
Description
Jobs
2002
Jobs
2013
Change
(2002-2013)
% Change
(2002-2013)
Average Total
Earnings
2013
11 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting 1,079 1,147 68 6% $28,778
21 Mining, Quarrying, & Oil & Gas Extraction 128 56 -72 -56% $12,669
22 Utilities 280 238 -42 -15% $170,367
23 Construction 3,336 2,679 -657 -20% $52,229
31-33 Manufacturing 9,621 7,756 -1,865 -19% $59,856
42 Wholesale Trade 1,264 1,413 149 12% $52,109
44-45 Retail Trade 7,053 6,586 -467 -7% $23,792
48-49 Transportation & Warehousing 2,341 2,100 -241 -10% $47,542
51 Information 834 396 -438 -53% $33,440
52 Finance & Insurance 1,269 1,496 227 18% $55,537
53 Real Estate & Rental & Leasing 1,831 2,109 278 15% $23,970
54 Professional, Scientific & Technical Services 1,505 1,553 48 3% $35,344
55 Management of Companies and Enterprises 70 154 84 120% $72,808
56 Administrative & Waste Management 2,654 2,994 340 13% $25,878
61 Educational Services (Private) 538 544 6 1% $26,159
62 Health Care & Social Assistance 6,464 5,952 -512 -8% $53,014
71 Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 1,864 1,783 -81 -4% $27,561
72 Accommodation and Food Services 3,825 4,272 447 12% $14,953
81 Other Services (except Public Administration) 2,756 2,980 224 8% $19,429
90 Government 8,156 7,262 -894 -11% $48,160
99 Unclassified Industry <10 <10 - - -
All Total 56,870 53,473 -3,397 -6% $40,108
Economy
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors
section 03

20. 20
Employment Increase Employment Decrease
Industries with the largest gains and losses
in employment numbers between 2002 &
2013:
Industry distribution and change
The largest percentage gains in
employment in LaPorte County
occurred in:
 Management of Companies and
Enterprises (+120.0 percent)
 Finance and Insurance (+17.9 percent)
The largest percentage losses in
employment occurred in:
 Mining,Quarrying and Oil andGas
Extraction (-56.3 percent)
 Information (-52.5 percent)
Economy
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors
section 03
Manufacturing
(-1,865)
Government
(-894)
Construction
(-657)
Accommodation
and Food Services
(+447)
Administrative and
Waste Management
(+340)

21. 21
Sales & Related
14.3%
Office &
Administrative
Support
12.6%
Production
9.9%
Food Preparation
& Serving Related
8.7%
Transportation &
Material Moving
6.2%
All Other
Occupations
48.3%
Top five occupations in 2013
The top five occupations in
LaPorte County represent 51.7
percent of all jobs.
Sales & Related (14.3 percent of the
workforce with 7,660 jobs) and Office &
Administrative Support (12.6 percent of
the labor force involving 6,723 jobs)
represent the top two occupations in
LaPorte County.
Transportation & Material Moving is the
smallest of the top five occupations in
the county (with 6.2 percent of the
workforce and 3,319 jobs).
Economy
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors
section 03

22. 22
SOC Description
Jobs
2002
Jobs
2013
Change
(2002-2013)
% Change
(2002-2013)
Hourly
Earnings 2013
11 Management 3,154 3,142 -12 0% $24.49
13 Business & Financial Operations 1,617 1,664 47 3% $24.27
15 Computer & Mathematical 485 426 -59 -12% $24.56
17 Architecture & Engineering 782 646 -136 -17% $28.86
19 Life, Physical & Social Science 232 226 -6 -3% $25.61
21 Community & Social Service 916 732 -184 -20% $16.95
23 Legal 228 198 -30 -13% $26.42
25 Education, Training & Library 2,372 2,350 -22 -1% $20.93
27 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports & Media 1,094 1,013 -81 -7% $13.34
29 Health Care Practitioners & Technical 2,460 2,384 -76 -3% $41.47
31 Health Care Support 1,358 1,266 -92 -7% $11.87
33 Protective Service 2,129 1,965 -164 -8% $19.12
35 Food Preparation & Serving Related 4,396 4,664 268 6% $9.36
37 Building & Grounds Cleaning Maintenance 1,922 2,077 155 8% $10.13
39 Personal Care & Service 2,057 2,280 223 11% $9.41
41 Sales & Related 7,508 7,660 152 2% $13.60
43 Office & Administrative Support 7,640 6,723 -917 -12% $14.58
45 Farming, Fishing & Forestry 239 272 33 14% $9.55
47 Construction & Extraction 3,009 2,497 -512 -17% $19.90
49 Installation, Maintenance & Repair 2,216 2,023 -193 -9% $17.96
51 Production 6,556 5,302 -1,254 -19% $15.34
53 Transportation & Material Moving 3,877 3,319 -558 -14% $16.33
55 Military 383 375 -8 -2% $19.27
99 Unclassified 239 269 30 13% $11.58
All Total 56,870 53,473 -3,397 -6% $16.96
Occupation distribution and change
Economy
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors
section 03

23. 23
Occupations with the largest gains and
losses in employment numbers between
2002 & 2013:
Employment Increase Employment Decrease
Food Preparation &
Serving
(+268)
Personal Care &
Service
(+223)
Production
(-1,254)
Office &
Administrative
(-917)
Transportation &
Material Moving
(-558)
Occupation distribution and change
Economy
Source: Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI) – 2014.3 – QCEW Employees, Non-QCEW Employees, Self-Employed, and Extended Proprietors
section 03
The largest percentage gain in
employment in LaPorte County
occurred in:
 Farming, Fishery and Forestry
(+12.8 percent)
 Personal Care and Service (+10.8
percent)
 BuildingGrounds andCleaning
Maintenance (+8.1 percent)
The largest percentage loss in
employment occurred in:
 Community and Social Service (-
20.1 percent)
 Production (-19.1 percent)

24. 24
Income and poverty
2000 2006 2013
Total Population in
Poverty
9.5% 12.0% 17.0%
Minors (up to age 17) in
Poverty
12.7% 18.6% 26.9%
Real Median Income
(2013 base year)
$ 53,611 $ 53,213 $ 46,610
The median income in LaPorte
County dipped by $7,000
between 2000 and 2013 in real
dollars (that is, adjusted for
inflation).
Both the total population in poverty
and the number of minors in poverty
increased since 2000. A key statistic
is that the number of minors in
poverty more than doubled between
2000 and 2013.
Economy
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE)
section 03

25. 25
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
42,000
44,000
46,000
48,000
50,000
52,000
54,000
56,000
PopulationinPoverty(percent)
RealMedianIncome(2013dollars)
Median Income
Minors in Poverty
All Ages in Poverty
Income and poverty
Median income in LaPorte County has decreased in recent years, while poverty has
continued to increase.
Economy
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE)
section 03

26. 26
Takeaways
Growth in the number of establishments in
LaPorte County occurred in businesses
having fewer than 10 employees (the self-
employed and Stage 1 enterprises). These
are two components of the local economy
that are often overlooked but may deserve
closer attention by local leaders.
Industries that have experienced major job losses
have tended to be in the manufacturing,
government, construction and health care and
social assistance sectors, all with average
earnings of $48,000 or more. Growth in jobs has
occurred in industries that pay decent wages
(such as Finance & Insurance andWholesale
Trade) but also by industries that provide low
average earnings (Accommodation & Food
Services, Administrative &Waste Management,
and Real Estate & Leasing). It may be these
shifts in the industry make-up of the county that
have contributed to a decline in median income (in
real dollars) and the upswing in the poverty rate in
LaPorte County since 2000.
With the exception of business and financial
operations, occupations that have grown the most
between 2002 and 2013 in the county pay an
average hourly rate of $9.36 to $13.60.This level of
compensation will not be sufficient to retain well-
educated or highly skilled workers.
It may be worthwhile for LaPorte County to focus
on policies and programs that strengthen high-
growth Stage 2 firms, since they tend to employ
several people and are capturing sizable sales.
Services targeted to poverty-stricken individuals
should be considered given the dramatic rise in
poverty, especially for children under 18 years old.
Economy
section 03

27. Labor force and
unemployment
Commuteshed
Laborshed
Takeaways
04
labor
market

28. 28
Labor force and unemployment
2002 2013
Labor Force 54,092 48,905
Unemployment
Rate
6.8% 9.4%
The labor force in LaPorte County
decreased by 9.6 percent between
2002 and 2013.
This decrease is likely due to a rise in the
number of individuals who are either
officially unemployed or who have given
up looking for a job.
Labor market
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics
section 04

29. 29
3.3%
6.8%
5.1%
11.9%
9.4%
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
UnemploymentRate(percent)
Unemployment rate
Unemployment increased dramatically after 2007, peaking at 11.9 percent in 2009. Since
that time, the rate has been on a slow but steady decline, dipping to 9.4 percent by 2013.
Labor market
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Local Area Unemployment Statistics
section 04

30. 30
Commuteshed
A county’s commuteshed is the
geographic area to which its
work force travels to work.
Forty-nine percent of employed
residents in LaPorte County
commute to jobs located outside of
LaPorte County.
The top counties where LaPorte
county residents commute are Lake
County (4,685 workers), Porter
County (4,609 workers) and St.
Joseph County (3,214 workers).
Labor market
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)
section 04
22,710
Out-Commuters
23,405
Same Work/
Home
Commuters Proportion
Lake, IN 4,685 10.2%
Porter, IN 4,609 10.0%
St. Joseph, IN 3,214 7.0%
Marion, IN 1,614 3.5%
Berrien, MI 1,202 2.6%

31. 31
Commuteshed in 2011
Labor market
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD
Seventy-five percent of LaPorte
County’s working residents are
employed either in LaPorte, Lake
or Porter Counties. Another 5
percent commute to Cook
County, Illinois, or Berrien
County, Michigan. An additional 5
percent travel to jobs in St.
Joseph or Marion Counties.
Collectively, these seven counties
represent 85 percent of the
commuteshed for LaPorte
County.

32. 32
Laborshed
Commuters Proportion
Porter, IN 4,219 10.6%
Lake, IN 2,009 5.0%
St. Joseph, IN 1,647 4.1%
Berrien, MI 897 2.3%
Marion, IN 789 2.0%
Labor market
Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)
section 04
16,415
In-Commuters
23,405
Same Work/
Home
A county’s laborshed is the
geographic area from which it
draws employees.
Forty-one percent of individuals working
in LaPorte County commute from
another county for work. Porter County,
Indiana, and Lake County, Indiana, are
the biggest sources of outside labor for
LaPorte County.
Forty-eight percent of in-commuters
reside in counties adjacent to LaPorte
County; however, the fifth largest
laborshed county is the Indianapolis
metropolitan area (Marion County,
Indiana).

33. 33
Laborshed in 2011
Labor market
section 04
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, OTM, LEHD, PCRD
The bulk (75 percent) of LaPorte
County’s workforce is drawn from
LaPorte, Lake, and Porter Counties.
Another 5 percent is drawn from
St. Joseph County in Indiana and
Berrien County in Michigan. An
additional 5 percent come from
Starke and Marion Counties in
Indiana and Cook County in Illinois.
Combined, the eight counties
represent 85 percent of LaPorte
County’s laborshed.

34. 34
Takeaways
LaPorte County’s unemployment rate increased
after 2002, swelling to nearly 12 percent by 2009.
This increase occurred during the period of the
Great Recession (approximately 2008 to 2010).
The rate has since been declining.
Despite the modest changes in the population
over the past decade or more, the county’s labor
force has decreased since 2002, indicating that
there may be an increasing number of individuals
who are unemployed or are discouraged workers
(workers who have given up trying to find a job).
Employees that work but do not live in LaPorte
County tend to commute from surrounding
counties. People who commute out of the county
for work often travel to other metropolitan areas.
LaPorte County should assess if a major
workforce development training effort should be
targeted to the growing number of working age
adults struggling to find jobs. Furthermore,
determining the human capital attributes of
workers who commute to jobs outside the county
might be insightful. It may provide the
information needed to determine how best to
reduce the leakage of educated and skilled
workers to surrounding counties.
The laborshed and commuteshed data
suggest there may be some value in
exploring economic and workforce
development from a regional (multi-
county) basis.
Labor market
section 04

35. 35
Report Contributors
This report was prepared by the Purdue Center for Regional Development in partnership with
Purdue University Extension.
section 04
Data Analysis
Indraneel Kumar, Ph.D.
Ayoung Kim
Report Authors
Elizabeth Dobis
Bo Beaulieu, Ph.D.
Report Design
Tyler Wright
Adeline Jackson
It is the policy of the Purdue University Cooperative Extension Service that all persons have equal opportunity and access to its
educational programs, services, activities, and facilities without regard to race, religion, color, sex, age, national origin or ancestry,
marital status, parental status, sexual orientation, disability or status as a veteran. Purdue University is an Affirmative Action institution.
This material may be available in alternative formats.

36. FOR MORE
INFORMATION
Purdue Center for Regional Development
(PCRD) . . .
seeks to pioneer new ideas and strategies that contribute
to regional collaboration, innovation and prosperity.
Purdue Extension Community Development
(CD) . . .
works to strengthen the capacity of local leaders, residents
and organizations to work together to develop and sustain
strong, vibrant communities.
Please contact
Mary Foell
County ExtensionCommunity
Development Educator
219-324-9407
mfoell@purdue.edu
OR