[Factors] [States Ranked By All 21 Factors]
[Healthiest State Rankings 1993 to 1999] [Methodology] [Press Release]
1999 HEALTHIEST STATE AWARD |
||||||||
1999 RANK |
STATE |
SUM |
1998 RANK |
1999 RANK |
STATE |
SUM |
1998 RANK |
|
1 |
Minnesota |
18.49 |
2 |
26 |
Indiana |
3.56 |
35 |
|
2 |
Hawaii |
17.63 |
1 |
27 |
South Dakota |
3.44 |
8 |
|
3 |
Vermont |
16.76 |
4 |
28 |
Alaska |
3.42 |
20 |
|
4 |
New Hampshire |
15.96 |
3 |
29 |
Idaho |
2.06 |
15 |
|
5 |
Nebraska |
14.18 |
10 |
30 |
Illinois |
1.44 |
26 |
|
6 |
Iowa |
12.32 |
7 |
31 |
Oklahoma |
1.13 |
38 |
|
7 |
Maine |
11.77 |
14 |
32 |
North Carolina |
(0.32) |
27 |
|
8 |
Kansas |
10.9 |
6 |
33 |
Michigan |
(0.84) |
31 |
|
8 |
Massachusetts |
10.9 |
16 |
34 |
Georgia |
(1.45) |
21 |
|
10 |
Utah |
10.72 |
5 |
35 |
Arizona |
(1.78) |
39 |
|
10 |
Washington |
10.72 |
13 |
36 |
West Virginia |
(1.94) |
41 |
|
12 |
Montana |
9.24 |
11 |
37 |
Kentucky |
(2.71) |
44 |
|
13 |
North Dakota |
8.55 |
29 |
38 |
Missouri |
(3.47) |
48 |
|
14 |
Wyoming |
7.57 |
18 |
39 |
Tennessee |
(3.85) |
47 |
|
15 |
Wisconsin |
7.36 |
23 |
40 |
Delaware |
(5.71) |
32 |
|
16 |
Virginia |
7.09 |
16 |
41 |
Texas |
(7.33) |
36 |
|
17 |
Oregon |
6.64 |
24 |
42 |
Florida |
(8.54) |
42 |
|
18 |
Ohio |
6.6 |
33 |
43 |
New York |
(8.59) |
28 |
|
19 |
California |
6.44 |
12 |
44 |
New Mexico |
(9.00) |
34 |
|
20 |
Connecticut |
6.38 |
9 |
45 |
Arkansas |
(9.34) |
50 |
|
21 |
Rhode Island |
5.82 |
22 |
46 |
South Carolina |
(10.96) |
43 |
|
22 |
Pennsylvania |
4.72 |
37 |
47 |
Nevada |
(12.23) |
39 |
|
23 |
New Jersey |
4.39 |
25 |
48 |
Alabama |
(12.57) |
46 |
|
24 |
Colorado |
4.1 |
30 |
49 |
Mississippi |
(15.85) |
45 |
|
25 |
Maryland |
3.65 |
18 |
50 |
Louisiana |
(17.92) |
49 |
|
| METHODOLOGY-- A
New Method: Twenty-one factors were chosen
from our 1999 Health Care State Rankings book that reflect basic health care and
access to health care. Two factors, percent change in uninsured and hospitals per 1,000
square miles, were removed from this year‘s rankings. In addition, the cancer death
rate factor was replaced with the age-adjusted death rate by malignant neoplasms. The 21
factors were divided into two groups: those that are "negative" where a high
ranking would be considered bad for a state and those that are "positive" for
which a high ranking would be considered good for a state. In previous years, rankings
were determined based on a simple average of the state’s rankings for these factors.
This year, following the methodology used for our Dangerous State and Safest/Dangerous
City Awards, a new approach was taken. Rates for each of the 21 factors were processed
through a formula that measures how a state compares to the national average for a given
category. The positive and negative nature of each factor was taken into account as part
of the formula. Once these computations were made, the factors then were weighted (factors
were weighted equally.) These weighted scores were then added together to get a state’s final score ("SUM" on the table above.) This way, states are assessed based on how they stack up against the national average. The end result is that the farther below the national average a state’s health ranking is, the lower (and less healthy) it ranks. The farther above the national average, the higher (and healthier) a state ranks. The table above shows how each state fared in the 1999 Healthiest State Award as well as its placement in 1998. |