Military Recruiting 2005

<!--StartFragment -->A new analysis of military recruiting shows that the wealthier neighborhoods became even more under-represented in the Army in 2005 while low- and middle-income neighborhoods became more over-represented compared to 2004.

The summary [1] below highlights NPP's research results on military recruiting in 2005, along with comparisons to 2004 where possible. The tables and charts provide added information. Active-duty Army recruits were emphasized in the research, but data and statistics for the Army, Air Force, Marines and Navy for 2005 by ZIP code, county, state and national level are available on the NPP Database [2]. Data for the Army, Air Force and Navy is also available for 2004.

• Chart: Army recruits by neighborhood income, 2005 [3]
• Chart: Army recruits by neighborhood income, 2004-2005 [4]
• Chart: Army recruits per 1000 youth by urban-rural range, 2005 [5]
• Table: Military recruits by race and ethnicity, 2005 [6]
• Chart: Spending on Military Recruiting [7]

• Chart: Northeast: Army recruits by urban-rural range, 2005 [5]
• Chart: Midwest: Army recruits by urban-rural range, 2005 [8]
• Chart: South: Army recruits by urban-rural range, 2005 [9]
• Chart: West: Army recruits by urban-rural range, 2005 [10]

• Table: Military recruits, total and per 1000 youth, 2005 [11]
• Table: Army recruits, total and per 1000 youth by state, 2004-2005 [12]
• Table: Army recruits by race and ethnicity by state, 2005 [13]
• Table: Army recruits per 1000 youth by race and state, 2005 [13]
• Chart: Northeastern states: Army representation ratio, 2004-2005 [14]
• Chart: Midwestern states: Army representation ratio, 2004-2005 [15]
• Chart: Southern states: Army representation ratio, 2004-2005 [16]
• Chart: Western states: Army representation ratio, 2004-2005 [10]
• Table: High School Diplomas by State and Race, 2005 [17]

• All Army recruits [18]
• Black Army recruits [19]
• Hispanic Army recruits [20]
• White Army recruits [21]

• All Army recruits [22]
• Black Army recruits [19]
• Hispanic Army recruits [20]
• White Army recruits [21]
• List of Army Bases by County [23]

Analysis of Military Recruiting in 2005

Like 2004, neighborhoods with median household incomes ranging between $30,000-$59,999 were over-represented in terms of active-duty Army recruits. (The comparable median household income is $47,837.) Neighborhoods with median household income of $60,000 and above were under-represented. However, there was a change in 2005. The wealthier neighborhoods - all neighborhoods above $55,000 - declined in representation. Taken together, all of these neighborhoods became more under-represented in 2005. Neighborhoods with median household incomes between $30,000-$54,999 became more over-represented. The share of Army recruits from those areas increased.

Youth from counties classified as 'completely rural' were more likely to sign up than youth from metro counties (essentially cities and suburbs). However, metro counties do account for the most recruits as they contain around 85% of the population.

The West had more recruits per thousand youth in completely rural counties compared to other regions. The South, while still having slightly more recruits per thousand youth in rural counties, had the highest rate in metro counties. The Northeast had the lowest rate for metro counties.

Montana with highest recruiting rate

Montana had the highest number of active-duty military recruits per thousand youth (5.7) followed by Texas (5.2) and Oklahoma (5.1). The states with the lowest military recruits per thousand youth were Rhode Island (2.3) and the District of Columbia (1.7).

Montana also had the highest number of active-duty Army recruits per thousand youth (2.5) followed by Oklahoma (2.4) and Texas (2.3). All three of these states had more recruits per thousand youth than they did in 2004, while Maine, the highest in 2004, declined.

The counties with the highest active-duty Army recruits per thousand youth were Harmon County, Oklahoma (11.2); Galax city, Virginia (10.5); and Geary County, Kansas (10.3). [24] The most Army recruits came from Los Angeles County, California (1,326); Harris County, Texas (975); and Maricopa County, AZ (861).

About 86% of all active-duty Army recruits had regular high school diplomas or higher education levels in 2005, falling short of the Department of Defense's goal of 90%. A larger percentage of Black recruits - just over 90% - had regular high school diplomas than did Whites with just under 85%. States ranged: Mississippi had the smallest percentage of White Army recruits with a regular high school diploma (71.7%) while the District of Columbia had the largest (100%).

Out of the active-duty armed forces, the Navy had the highest percentages of Black (19%), Asian or Pacific Islander (6%), American Indian or Alaska Native (7%), and Hispanic recruits (16%). (Hispanics may be of any race.) The Army had the largest percentage of White recruits (80%). The Marines, however, recorded more than 25% of its recruits with no indication of race or ethnicity.

High Black and White recruiting rates in Geary County, Kansas

The highest number of Black Army recruits per thousand Black youth was in Geary County, Kansas; Ashtabula County, Ohio; and Covington County, Alabama in 2005. The most Black Army recruits came from Kings County, New York; Cook County, Illinois; and Cumberland County, North Carolina.

The highest number of Hispanic Army recruits per thousand Hispanic youth was in Douglas County, Oregon; Christian County, Kentucky; and Newport News city, Virginia.  The most Hispanic recruits came from Los Angeles County, California; Bexar County, Texas; and Harris County, Texas.

The highest number of White Army recruits per thousand White youth was in Galax city, Virginia; Geary County, Kansas; and McIntosh County, Georgia.  The most White recruits came from Los Angeles County, California; Maricopa, Arizona; and Harris County, Texas.

The South had the highest Army representation ratio, where the region's share of recruits over its share of youth population was higher than the other regions in the country. The Midwest had the larger increase in representation ratio. While Maine had the highest Army representation ratio in 2004, its ratio fell as did all states in the Northeast region. All states in the Midwest increased in representation except for Kansas which declined, but remained over-represented, and North Dakota, which remained under-represented. In the South, eight states declined and nine states increased. [25]

The recruiting and advertising budget includes Department of Defense spending on operating the recruiting stations and advertising. The budget rose to $1.5 billion in 2005 and will surpass $1.8 billion this fiscal year. However that amount does not include the pay and benefits of 22,000 military recruiters and recruiting-related spending such as enlistment bonuses used to entice new recruits. The total amount spent on all military recruiting is around $4 billion per year.