Skip directly to searchSkip directly to the site navigationSkip directly to the page's main content

Health Highlight Report for Dona Ana County

Overview

The New Mexico Department of Health has published these community health measures to support community efforts to:
  • Track and evaluate progress toward goals
  • Guide policy decisions, priorities and long-range strategic plans
  • Enhance performance-orientation and overall accountability
  • Develop, focus, and streamline data collection and reporting capacity
  • Provide comprehensive information on New Mexico's health and health care system

Quick Facts

map of New Mexico showing county highlighted County Administrative Offices:
845 North Motel Blvd.
Las Cruces, NM 88007-0000
Phone: (575) 647-7201 - Fax: (575) 647-7304
http://www.co.dona-ana.nm.us

Communities: Anthony, Chaparral, Doņa Ana, Hatch, Las Cruces, Mesilla, Mesquite, Radium Springs, Rincon, Salem, Santa Teresa, Sunland Park, University Park, Vado, White Sands
Select a different county:


Quick Facts

Dona Ana
County
New Mexico
County Seat Las Cruces
Population (July 1, 2015) 216,577 2,099,856
% New Mexico Population 10.31% 100%
Land Area (Square miles) 3807.5 121,298
Persons per Sq. Mile (2015) 56.9 17.3
Resident Live Births (2015) 2,892 25,730
Deaths of NM Residents (2015) 1,509 17,687
Households (2011-2015) 83,586 909,565
You can find more Dona Ana County Quick Facts on the US Census Bureau website.

Map


View Larger Map

Leading Causes of Death
2013-2015

graph with 10 leading causes of death in New Mexico, county and state age-adjusted rates
Age-adjusted to the U.S. 2000 population.
Source: New Mexico Death Certificate Database, Office of Vital
Records and Health Statistics, New Mexico Department of Health.
Retrieved from New Mexico Department of Health, NM-IBIS website,
http://ibis.health.state.nm.us, on 2/16/2017.

This report is possible because of the work of all the NMDOH Data Stewards who maintain our health datasets, the NMDOH Indicator Report Authors and Editors who create and maintain the NM-IBIS indicator reports on which this report is based, and the people of New Mexico who support their efforts.




Birth Outcomes - Low Birthweight: Percentage Low Birthweight, 2014-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    8.0%
    95% Confidence Interval (7.4% - 8.6%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    8.8%
    U.S.
    8.2%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Low birthweight increases the risk for infant mortality and morbidity. As birthweight decreases, the risk for death increases. Low birthweight infants who survive often require intensive care at birth, may develop chronic illnesses, and later may require special education services. Health care costs and length of hospital stay are higher for low birthweight infants.

What Is Being Done?

The Maternal Health Program collaborates with the UNM Maternal & Family Planning (M & FP) and Presbyterian Medical Group perinatologists to provide care to high risk, medically indigent women. These services are provided to patients free of charge through the High Risk Prenatal Care Fund (HRF) at the UNM Health Sciences Center in Albuquerque, UNM outreach clinics and Presbyterian hospitals and clinics throughout the State. UNM maintains the Physician Access Line for Service (PALS), providing statewide access to a perinatologist 24/7 for telephone consultations and to arrange transport for patients requiring intensive management at the university, including women in preterm labor. Additionally, UNM Telemedicine offers the High Risk Pregnancy direct patient evaluation, real-time fetal ultrasound analysis and counseling whereby remotely practicing physicians can access specialty services for patients. This network of care and screening is designed to prevent low birthweight births through specialized care to the mother. These high risk providers are the most likely to anticipate and recognize preterm labor and other conditions where delivery at a tertiary care center is desirable and make appropriate transfers of care to them. Women in premature labor or with other pregnancy related complications may transfer out of the state if another tertiary care center is closer than Albuquerque. Albuquerque has the only two level one neonatal intensive care units in the state. Data on which facilities these women transfer to is not available.

Healthy People Objective MICH-8.1:

Low birth weight (LBW)
U.S. Target: 7.8 percent

Note

Low birthweight is defined as less than 2,500 grams (about 5 pounds, 8 ounces). 

Data Sources

Birth Certificate Data, Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   U.S. Data Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/.  

Measure Description for Birth Outcomes - Low Birthweight

Definition: Low birthweight infants are those weighing less than 2,500 grams (about 5.5 pounds). The low birthweight rate is the number of live births under 2,500 grams divided by the total number of live births over the same time period.
Numerator: Number of live born infants weighing under 2,500 grams.
Denominator: Total number of live births.

Indicator Profile Report

Percentage of Live Born Infants With Low Birthweight (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/12/2017

Data Owner

Maternal/Child Health Epidemiology Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Santa Fe, 87502. Contact: Christopher Whiteside, MPH, Title V MCH Epidemiologist. 505-476-8825, Christopher.Whitesi@state.nm.us




Teen Birth Rate: Births per 1,000 Girls in the Population, 2014-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    34.2
    95% Confidence Interval (32.0 - 36.4)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    33.6
    U.S.
    20.3
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Factors in New Mexico's high teen birth rates are poverty, education, rural vs. urban population and access to services. Poverty is one of the most important contributing factors to teenage pregnancy. In 2015, New Mexico ranked highest among all states in percentage of children living in poverty (30% of children age 0-17 in poverty). Teens who drop out of school are more likely to become pregnant and have a child than peers who graduate. In 2015, 68.6% of NM high school students graduated on-time; NM's high school graduation rates fluctuate from 63% and 70.4% between 2011 and 2015 and are steadily declining since 2012 (Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2016). Teen parenthood is common in mixed urban/rural areas; in 2015, the highest teen birth rates are found in counties with a mixture of urban and rural populations (NM-IBIS, 2016). Some reasons for higher teen birth rates in mixed urban/rural areas include lack of health insurance, increased poverty, transportation barriers, and fewer recreational facilities. There is a lack of access to family planning services with all but one of NM counties classified as a health professional shortage area.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

Poverty is one of the most important contributing factors to teenage pregnancy. In 2013, New Mexico ranked 2nd among all states and the District of Columbia in percentage of children living in poverty (30.1% of children age 0-17 in poverty). Teens who have dropped out of school are more likely to become pregnant and have a child than their peers who stay in school. The NM high school dropout rate in 2012 was 29.6%, compared to 24.5% nationally. Teen parenthood is most common in rural areas.

How Are We Doing?

From 2010 to 2016 the teen birth rate in New Mexico for 15-19 year olds has declined by 45%, to a rate of 29.4 per 1,000 in 2016. That rate of decline is similar to the national decline of 41% (National Centers for Health Statistics, 2017). NM over the past few years has had one of the highest teen birth rates in the nation, but ranked fourth highest in 2015 (tied with Texas) (NCHS, 2016). The female population ages 15-19 in New Mexico is 58% Hispanic, and among the teens giving birth, 70% were Hispanic (NM IBIS, 2017). Birth rates to NM teens 15-19 years by race/ethnicity, 2005-2015: Birth rates for American Indian teens decreased by 38% Birth rates for Hispanic teens decreased by 52% Birth rates for African American teens decreased by 54% Birth rates for White teens decreased by 37% Birth rates for all teens decreased by 45%

What Is Being Done?

Confidential reproductive health services are provided at low- or no-cost at county public health offices, statewide, and some community health centers and school-based health centers. NM DOH FPP also funds community education programs focusing on service learning and positive youth development, adult/teen communication, and comprehensive sex education. Service learning programs engage youth in constructive activities to build on their strengths and interests, and increase their motivation to delay childbearing by providing positive alternatives and leadership opportunities. Teen Outreach Program (TOP) is an evidenced-based service learning and youth development program for teen pregnancy prevention, and reducing school failure and suspension for teens in grades 6-12. TOP combines life skills and adolescent reproductive health education with youth involvement in community service. TOP is designed to prevent risky behavior (teen violence, school failure, and teen pregnancy) by helping teens develop a positive self-image, effective life management skills and achievable goals. TOP offers a club setting for youth development. This offers teen participants social support that will influence their health behavior change. Comprehensive sex education is provided through the Cuidate program and Project AIM, which provide youth with age-appropriate and medically accurate information to reduce the risk of sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancy. These programs teach youth communication, negotiation, and life skills to support healthy and informed decision-making. Cultural beliefs and values are incorporated into the curricula to help youth make responsible decisions and promote healthy relationships. Adult/teen communication programming, like From Playground to Prom, gives adults information and skills to communicate effectively with young people about reducing risky sexual behavior. Parents influence teen decisions about sex more than their friends, the media, or their siblings. Most teens say that it would be much easier for them to postpone sexual activity if they had open, honest conversations with their parents or trusted adults. NM DOH FPP launched the BrdzNBz text messaging service in 2013. BrdsNBz New Mexico offers teens and parents free, confidential, and accurate answers to sexual health questions via text message in either English or Spanish. A teen or parent texts a question and a trained educator responds within 24 hours with an average time of 6 to 8 hours. Teens text NMTeen to 66746 and parents text NMParent to 66746. Through the text line, parents receive recommendations on ways they can increase their skills in talking to their teen about sexual health. Other State Agencies that work with teen pregnancy prevention include: Office of School and Adolescent Health provides primary care and behavioral health care at School-Based Health Centers. Family planning services are provided where approved by the school district. Public Education Department supports the Graduation, Reality and Dual-Role Skills (GRADS) Program, a vocational, in-school drop out recovery and intervention program for pregnant and parenting adolescent families; pregnancy prevention programs for traditional students; Career Readiness; Youth Development; and on-site childcare.

Evidence-based Practices

Access to confidential, low- or no-cost family planning services through county public health offices, community clinics, and school-based health centers. Increased availability of highly- and moderately-effective primary contraceptive methods for teens such as the hormonal implant, the IUD (intrauterine device), pill, injectable, and ring. Service-learning and positive youth development programs, adult-teen communication programs. Comprehensive sex education programs.

Healthy People Objective FP-8:

Reduce pregnancy rates among adolescent females
U.S. Target: Not applicable, see subobjectives in this category

Data Sources

Birth Certificate Data, Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.   U.S. Data Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/.  

Measure Description for Teen Birth Rate

Definition: Teen Birth Rate is the number of births to females in the age group per 1,000 of the age group female population.
Numerator: The number of births to females in the age group per year.
Denominator: The population of females in the age group per year.

Indicator Profile Report

Teen Birth Rate for Girls Age 15-19 (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/12/2017

Data Owner

New Mexico Department of Health Family Planning Program, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM 87502. Susan Lovett, Program Manager, (505) 476-8882, susan.lovett@state.nm.us




Breastfeeding in Early Postpartum Period: Breastfeeding Exclusively at Two Months Postpartum, 1997-2010

  • Dona Ana County
    29.7%
    95% Confidence Interval (27.6% - 32.0%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    34.1%
    U.S.
    56.3%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Breastfeeding provides a variety of important benefits for infants, mothers, families, society, and environment. It is the normal, preferred feeding for all infants, including premature and sick babies, with rare exceptions (American Academy of Pediatrics, 1997). Breast milk benefits the newborn infant by providing the ideal balance of nutrients, enzymes, immunoglobulin, anti-infective and anti-inflammatory substances, hormones, and growth factors. Breastfeeding helps the mother return to the physiologic pre-pregnant state. It benefits both mother and child by providing a time of intense, nurturing, maternal-infant interaction. In addition, breastfeeding provides social and economic benefits to the family, including reduced health care costs and reduced employee absenteeism for care related to children's illnesses.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

In the event that a mother is separated from her newborn (due to medical condition of mother or baby), a hospital-grade breast pump should be provided and utilized to establish successful lactation.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Program WIC supports over 70% of NM women giving live birth, either prenatally or postpartum and promotes and supports breastfeeding. WIC Breastfeeding Promotion activities include: training of professional and paraprofessional staff, providing grants to local agencies for "Peer Counseling Programs," providing hand pumps and electric pumps to WIC mothers, and developing written policies for WIC clinics that promote breastfeeding. State and Federal laws protect pumping of breast milk in the workplace: USE OF A BREAST PUMP IN THE WORKPLACE: NMSA 1978, Section 28-20-2 (amended 2007) requires employers to provide flexible break time, and a clean, private space, not a bathroom, in order to foster the ability of a nursing mother who is an employee to use a breast pump in the workplace.

Healthy People Objective MICH-21.4:

Increase the proportion of infants who are breastfed: Exclusively through 3 months
U.S. Target: 46.2 percent

Note

The following county estimates were combined due to small number of surveys: Colfax & Union; Catron & Sierra; De Baca & Harding & Quay; Guadelupe & San Miguel.  U.S. value is 2008 median value for 29 participating states. Question wording: Did you ever breastfeed or pump breast milk to feed your new baby after delivery? How many weeks or months did you breastfeed or pump milk to feed your baby? How old was your new baby the first time you fed him or her anything besides breast milk?

Data Sources

New Mexico Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System, Family Health Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health.  

Measure Description for Breastfeeding in Early Postpartum Period

Definition: The percentage of mothers who ever breastfed and were breastfeeding exclusively at two months.
Numerator: The number of PRAMS survey respondents who indicated they were breastfeeding at each of the two time periods.
Denominator: The total number of women in the PRAMS survey sample.

Indicator Profile Report

Percentage of Mothers Breastfeeding (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

05/25/2012

Data Owner

Pregnancy Risk Assessment and Monitoring System, New Mexico Department of Health, Public Health Division, Family Health Bureau, Santa Fe, NM. Telephone: (505) 476-8938




Infant Mortality: Infant Deaths per 1,000 Live Births, 2012-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    5.7
    95% Confidence Interval (4.5 - 7)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    5.8
    U.S.
    5.9
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

The infant mortality rate is often used as an indicator of the level of health and is a commonly-used measure of public health for countries around the world. While the infant mortality rate has been declining in the U.S., in New Mexico the trend has remained fairly level.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

Risk factors include: congenital abnormalities, prematurity, low birth weight, and air pollution in the form of particulate matter. Risk factors that may increase a woman's chance of fetal loss include: pre-pregnancy obesity, lower socio-economic status, older age, and exposure to chemicals during pregnancy.

How Are We Doing?

Overall, congenital malformations, deformations and chromosomal abnormalities are the leading cause of infant death (20.1% of deaths). Disorders related to short gestation and low birth weight are second, making up 16.6% of deaths. However, it is important to keep in mind that cause of death varies over the first year of life, and combining all causes during the first year of life obscures the importance of sudden infant death syndrome as the leading cause of death in the postneonatal period.

Healthy People Objective MICH-1.3:

All infant deaths (within 1 year)
U.S. Target: 6.0 infant deaths per 1,000 live births

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Birth Certificate Data, Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, CDC WONDER Online Database (http://wonder.cdc.gov).  

Measure Description for Infant Mortality

Definition: Infant mortality rates are calculated as the number of resident infant deaths occurring in a given infant age group in a given year per 1,000 resident live births in the same year.
Numerator: For infant mortality: number of deaths of resident infant younger than 1 year of age in a given year. For neonatal mortality: number of deaths of resident infant younger than 28 days of age in a given year. For perinatal mortality: number fetal deaths of at least 28 weeks gestation, plus the number of infant deaths less than 7 days old in a given year. For post-neonatal mortality: number of deaths of resident infants from 28 days of age to less than 1 year in a given year.
Denominator: Total number of resident live births in the same year. For perinatal mortality, the denominator is the total number of resident live births plus fetal deaths of at least 28 weeks gestation.

Indicator Profile Report

Infant Mortality (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/11/2017

Data Owner

Environmental Health Epidemiology Bureau, Environmental Public Health Tracking Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Suite 1320, Santa Fe, NM 87505, Heidi Krapfl, Chief, (505) 476-3577, heidi.krapfl@state.nm.us, or Brian Woods, Environmental Epidemiologist, (505) 827-2868, brian.woods@state.nm.us




Birth Defects: Prevalence of Spina Bifida (without Anencephaly) per 10,000 Live Births: Prevalence per 10,000 Live Births, 2006-2011

  • Dona Ana County
    4.4
    95% Confidence Interval (1.2 - 7.7)
    Statistical StabilityUnstable
    New Mexico
    4.9
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Birth defects pose a significant public health problem. One in 33 babies is born with a structural birth defect in the United States. Birth defects are a leading cause of infant mortality and responsible for considerable morbidity with enormous economic and social costs. In 1992, the U.S. Public Health Service recommended that women of childbearing age increase consumption of the vitamin folic acid to reduce the number of spina bifida and anencephaly cases in the United States. By 1998, <30% of women were following this recommendation. In 2001, researchers from CDC determined that the overall birth prevalence of these two neural tube defects declined 19% after mandatory folic acid fortification.

Healthy People Objective MICH-28.1:

Reduce the occurrence of spina bifida
U.S. Target: 30.8 live births and/or fetal deaths with spina bifida per 100,000 live births

Note

Spina Bifida is a neural tube defect resulting from failure of the spinal neural tube to close. This usually results in damage to the spinal cord with paralysis of the involved limbs. Includes myelomeningocele (involving both spinal cord and meninges) and meningocele (involving just the meninges). The following International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes were used to identify spina bifida without anencephaly: 741.0, 741.9 without 740.0 - 740.10. In 1987, CDC put forth a set of 6 digit codes (the sixth digit provides greater specificity for diagnosis) based on the British Pediatric Association Classification of Diseases and the ICD-9-CM. If CDC/BPA codes are present, the following were used to identify spina bifida without anencephaly: 741.000 - 741.990 without 740.000 - 740.100. 

Data Sources

Birth Defects Prevention and Surveillance System (BDPASS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Birth Certificate Data, Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.  

Measure Description for Birth Defects: Prevalence of Spina Bifida (without Anencephaly) per 10,000 Live Births

Definition: Prevalence of spina bifida is the number of live-born infants with spina bifida but without anencephaly per 10,000 live-born infants. (Live-born infants are infants born with any evidence of life.)
Numerator: Number of live-born infants with spina bifida (without anencephaly)
Denominator: Number of live-born infants

Indicator Profile Report

Prevalence of Spina Bifida without Anencephaly (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

07/31/2014

Data Owner

Environmental Health Epidemiology Bureau, Environmental Public Health Tracking Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Suite 1320, Santa Fe, NM 87505, Heidi Krapfl, Chief, (505) 476-3577, heidi.krapfl@state.nm.us, or Brian Woods, Environmental Epidemiologist, (505) 827-2868, brian.woods@state.nm.us




Asthma Hospitalizations: Hospital Discharges per 10,000 Children Age 0-14, 2008-2013

  • Dona Ana County
    9.3
    95% Confidence Interval (8 - 10.8)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    17
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases in New Mexico, with an estimated 150,000 adults and 47,000 children currently having the disease. People with asthma are more likely to miss school or work, report feelings of depression, and experience an overall reduced quality of life. Asthma is also costly, with expenses from routine checkups, emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and medications putting a significant burden on families, the health care sector, and the economy. Though it cannot be cured, asthma can be controlled through quality health care, appropriate medications, and good self-management skills. When asthma is controlled, people with the disease have few, if any, symptoms, and can live normal and productive lives.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

Asthma event triggers or risk factors include viral infections, allergens (like pollen in the air, molds, the house dust mite, cockroach droppings, animal dander, or foods), or irritants (like smoke and other air pollutants). Smoking and obesity are also risk factors for asthma. Prematurity is another risk factor for asthma development.

How Are We Doing?

New Mexico age-adjusted hospitalization rates have remained steady since 2000.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Department of Health Asthma Program collects, analyzes, and disseminates asthma data in order to identify populations that have high hospitalization rates. The Asthma Program also works with partners throughout the state (such as hospitals, physician groups, insurance plans, and schools) to design and implement health interventions to lessen the disease burden. Current interventions include providing asthma self-management education to pediatric patients, supporting indoor air quality assessments of schools to limit exposures to potential asthma triggers, and offering provider training on the NAEPP asthma medical guidelines.

Healthy People Objective RD-2:

Reduce hospitalizations for asthma
U.S. Target: Not applicable, see subobjectives in this category

Note

No asthma hospitalizations occurred for this age group in Catron, Guadalupe, and Harding Counties during this time period.

Data Sources

Hospital Inpatient Discharge Data, New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Data Source: Geospatial and Population Studies Program, University of New Mexico. http://bber.unm.edu/bber_research_demPop.html.  

Measure Description for Asthma Hospitalizations

Definition: An asthma hospitalization is an admission to the hospital by a New Mexico resident that occurs in state with asthma listed as the primary (first-listed) diagnosis. Asthma hospitalizations include those with ICD-9 codes 493.0-493.92.
Numerator: Number of hospital admissions where asthma is the primary (first-listed) diagnosis.
Denominator: Estimated total number of New Mexico residents in a specified population over a specified time period.

Indicator Profile Report

Asthma Hospital Admissions Among Children (Ages 0-14 Years) (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

10/27/2014

Data Owner

Environmental Health Epidemiology Bureau, Environmental Public Health Tracking Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Suite 1320, Santa Fe, NM 87505, Heidi Krapfl, Chief, (505) 476-3577, heidi.krapfl@state.nm.us, or Brian Woods, Environmental Epidemiologist, (505) 827-2868, brian.woods@state.nm.us




Asthma Prevalence in Adults: Percentage Diagnosed with Asthma, 2012-2014

  • Dona Ana County
    13.2%
    95% Confidence Interval (11.5% - 15.0%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New MexicoDNA
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases in New Mexico, with an estimated 150,000 adults and 47,000 children currently having the disease. People with asthma are more likely to miss school or work, report feelings of depression, and experience an overall reduced quality of life. Asthma is also costly, with expenses from routine checkups, emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and medications putting a significant burden on families, the health care sector, and the economy. Though it cannot be cured, asthma can be controlled through quality health care, appropriate medications, and good self-management skills. When asthma is controlled, people with the disease have few, if any, symptoms, and can live normal and productive lives. Asthma is frequently diagnosed in childhood. Sometimes asthma symptoms may go dormant for a number of years only to return later in adulthood. Given this complexity, two prevalence measures are helpful in assessing the disease burden: Lifetime prevalence (if an individual has ever been diagnosed as having asthma) and Current prevalence (if the individual reports he or she still has asthma).

Risk and Resiliency Factors

Obesity and smoking both increase the likelihood of an individual developing asthma.

How Are We Doing?

Since 2000, the lifetime and current adult asthma prevalence rates in New Mexico have been increasing.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Department of Health Asthma Program collects, analyzes, and disseminates asthma data in order to identify populations that are disproportionately affected by asthma. The Asthma Program also works with partners throughout the state (such as hospitals, physician groups, insurance plans, and schools) to design and implement health interventions to lessen the disease burden. Current interventions include providing asthma self-management education to pediatric patients, supporting indoor air quality assessments of schools to limit exposures to potential asthma triggers, and offering provider training on the NAEPP asthma medical guidelines.

Note

**Percentages based on fewer than 50 completed surveys are not shown because they do not meet the DOH standard for data release. For 2007-2009, De Baca, Harding, and Hidalgo counties did not meet the DOH small numbers rule. The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Asthma Prevalence in Adults

Definition: The estimated percentage of New Mexico adults with diagnosed asthma.
Numerator: LIFETIME PREVALENCE: Estimated number of adult (18 and older) New Mexicans who responded, "yes" (within the survey year) to the BRFSS question: "Have you ever been told by a doctor that you have asthma?". CURRENT PREVALENCE: Estimated number of adult (18 and older) New Mexicans who responded, "yes" (within the survey year) to the BRFSS question: "Do you still have asthma?".
Denominator: Number of adult (18 and older) New Mexicans in a specified population who responded to the BRFSS within the survey year.

Indicator Profile Report

Adult Asthma (Age 18 and over) (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

04/04/2016

Data Owner

Environmental Health Epidemiology Bureau, Asthma Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Suite 1320, Santa Fe, NM 87505, Heidi Krapfl, Chief, (505) 476-3577, heidi.krapfl@state.nm.us




Alcohol - Alcohol-Related Death: Deaths per 100,000 Population, 2011-2015

  • Dona Ana County
    39.8
    95% Confidence Interval (35.9 - 43.7)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    57.2
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

The consequences of excessive alcohol use are severe in New Mexico. New Mexico's total alcohol-related death rate has ranked 1st, 2nd, or 3rd in the U.S. since 1981; and 1st for the period 1997 through 2007 (the most recent year for which state comparison data are available). The negative consequences of excessive alcohol use in New Mexico are not limited to death, but also include domestic violence, crime, poverty, and unemployment, as well as chronic liver disease, motor vehicle crash and other injuries, mental illness, and a variety of other medical problems.

Evidence-based Practices

There is a large body of evidence on effective strategies to prevent excessive alcohol use and alcohol-related harm. In the past decade, this evidence base has been the subject of numerous systematic expert reviews to assess the quality and consistency of the evidence for particular strategies; and to make recommendations based on this evidence. These expert reviews have recently been summarized by the NMDOH. The following list summarizes the evidence-based prevention strategies that are well-recommended by experts; and that could be more widely or completely implemented in New Mexico to reduce our alcohol-related problems: [http://ibis.health.state.nm.us/docs/Evidence/EvidenceBasedExcessiveAlcoholUsePrevention.pdf]. The following is a bit more information on prevention in general, and alcohol-related prevention in particular. Primary prevention attempts to stop a problem before it starts. In New Mexico, primary prevention of alcohol-related health problems has focused on regulating access to alcohol and altering the alcohol consumption behavior of high-risk populations. Regulatory efforts have included increasing the price of alcohol (shown to be effective in deterring alcohol use among adolescents), establishing a minimum legal drinking age, regulating the density of liquor outlets, and increasing penalties for buyers and servers of alcohol to minors. DWI-related law enforcement (e.g., sobriety checkpoints), when accompanied by media activity, can also be an important form of primary prevention, increasing the perceived risk of driving after drinking among the general population. Secondary prevention efforts try to detect and treat emergent cases before they cause harm. Screening and brief interventions (SBI) for adults in primary care settings is an evidence-based intervention to address problem drinking before it causes serious harm. Implementing this intervention more broadly in New Mexico primary care settings could help reduce our serious burden of alcohol-related chronic disease and injury. Tertiary prevention involves the treatment of individuals diagnosed with alcohol use disorders so they can recover to the highest possible level of health while minimizing the effects of the disease and preventing complications. According to the most recent estimates from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), [http://oas.samhsa.gov/2k7State/NewMexico.htm#Tabs], roughly 130,000 New Mexicans report past-year alcohol dependence or abuse, indicating an acute need for treatment. However, fewer than one in ten people in need of treatment receives it. Nationally, the most common reasons that people who need and seek treatment do not receive it are because: they have no health insurance and cannot afford the cost; they are concerned about the possible negative effect on their job; or they are not ready to stop using.

Healthy People Objective SA-20:

Decrease the number of deaths attributable to alcohol
U.S. Target: 71,681 deaths

Note

Rates are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population. 

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.   U.S. Data Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/.  

Measure Description for Alcohol - Alcohol-Related Death

Definition: Alcohol-related death is defined as the total number of deaths attributed to alcohol per 100,000 population, age-adjusted to the U.S 2000 Standard Population. The alcohol-related death rates reported here are based on definitions and alcohol-attributable fractions from the CDC's Alcohol-Related Disease Impact (ARDI) website [http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/ardi/Homepage.aspx].
Numerator: Number of alcohol-related deaths in New Mexico
Denominator: New Mexico Population

Indicator Profile Report

Alcohol-related Deaths (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

03/10/2017

Data Owner

Substance Abuse Epidemiology, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N-1103, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Laura Tomedi, Alcohol Epidemiologist, by telephone at (505) 476-1757 or email to Laura.Tomedi@state.nm.us.




Alcohol: Alcohol-related Chronic Disease Deaths: Deaths per 100,000 Population, 2009-2013

  • Dona Ana County
    17.9
    95% Confidence Interval (15.3 - 20.5)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    25.2
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Chronic heavy drinking (defined as drinking, on average, more than two drinks per day for men, and more than one drink per day for women) often is associated with alcoholism or alcohol dependence, and can cause or contribute to a number of diseases, including alcoholic liver cirrhosis. For the past 15 years, New Mexico's death rate from alcohol-related chronic disease has consistently been first or second in the nation, and 1.5 to 2 times the national rate. Furthermore, while the national death rate from alcohol-related chronic disease has decreased, New Mexico's rate has increased. The five leading causes of alcohol-related chronic disease death in New Mexico are: alcohol-related chronic liver disease, alcohol dependence, hypertension, alcohol abuse, and hemorrhagic stroke. Alcohol-related chronic liver disease is the leading cause of alcohol-related death in New Mexico, with a rate almost twice the second leading cause (fall injuries).

Evidence-based Practices

There is a large body of evidence on effective strategies to prevent excessive alcohol use and alcohol-related harm. The following list summarizes the evidence-based prevention strategies that are well-recommended by experts; and that could be more widely or completely implemented in New Mexico to reduce our alcohol-related problems: http://ibis.health.state.nm.us/view/docs/Evidence/EvidenceBasedExcessiveAlcoholUsePrevention.pdf To access this list, please copy and paste the URL into your browser. For more information on this topic, see the "Evidence-based Practices" section of the Alcohol-Related Deaths indicator report (http://ibis.health.state.nm.us/indicator/important_facts/AlcoholRelatedDth.html).

Healthy People Objective SA-11:

Reduce cirrhosis deaths
U.S. Target: 8.2 deaths per 100,000 population

Note

Rates are age-adjusted to the US 2000 standard population. 

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Data Source: Geospatial and Population Studies Program, University of New Mexico. http://bber.unm.edu/bber_research_demPop.html.   U.S. Data Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/.  

Measure Description for Alcohol: Alcohol-related Chronic Disease Deaths

Definition: Alcohol-related chronic disease death is defined as the number of chronic disease deaths attributed to alcohol per 100,000 population. The alcohol-related chronic disease death rates reported here are based on definitions and alcohol-attributable fractions from the CDC's Alcohol-Related Disease Impact (ARDI) website (http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/ardi/Homepage.aspx).
Numerator: Number of alcohol-related chronic disease deaths in New Mexico
Denominator: New Mexico population

Indicator Profile Report

Alcohol-related Chronic Disease Deaths (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

11/26/2014

Data Owner

Substance Abuse Epidemiology, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N-1103, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Laura Tomedi, Alcohol Epidemiologist, by telephone at (505) 476-1757 or email to Laura.Tomedi@state.nm.us.




Alcohol: Alcohol-related Injury Deaths: Deaths per 100,000 Population, 2009-2013

  • Dona Ana County
    18.5
    95% Confidence Interval (15.8 - 21.2)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    27
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Binge drinking (defined as having five drinks or more on an occasion for men, and four drinks or more on an occasion for women) is a high-risk behavior associated with numerous injury outcomes, including motor vehicle fatalities, homicide, and suicide. Since 1990, New Mexico's death rate for alcohol-related (AR) injury has consistently been among the highest in the nation, ranging from 1.4 to 1.8 times the national rate. While New Mexico's alcohol-impaired motor vehicle crash fatality rates have declined more than 60% during this period, death rates from other AR injuries have increased. The five leading causes of alcohol-related injury death in New Mexico were: falls injuries, motor vehicle traffic crashes, non-alcohol poisoning, suicide, and homicide.

Evidence-based Practices

There is a large body of evidence on effective strategies to prevent excessive alcohol use and alcohol-related harm. The following list summarizes the evidence-based prevention strategies that are well-recommended by experts; and that could be more widely or completely implemented in New Mexico to reduce our alcohol-related problems: http://ibis.health.state.nm.us/view/docs/Evidence/EvidenceBasedExcessiveAlcoholUsePrevention.pdf To access this list, please copy and paste the URL into your browser. For more information on this topic, see the "Evidence-based Practices" section of the Alcohol-Related Deaths indicator report (http://ibis.health.state.nm.us/indicator/important_facts/AlcoholRelatedDth.html).

Healthy People Objective SA-20:

Decrease the number of deaths attributable to alcohol
U.S. Target: 71,681 deaths

Note

Rates are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population. 

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Data Source: Geospatial and Population Studies Program, University of New Mexico. http://bber.unm.edu/bber_research_demPop.html.   U.S. Data Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/.  

Measure Description for Alcohol: Alcohol-related Injury Deaths

Definition: Alcohol-related injury death is defined as the number of injury deaths attributed to alcohol per 100,000 population. The alcohol-related death rates reported here are based on definitions and alcohol-attributable fractions from the CDC's Alcohol-Related Disease Impact (ARDI) website (http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/ardi/Homepage.aspx).
Numerator: Number of alcohol-related injury deaths in New Mexico
Denominator: New Mexico Population

Indicator Profile Report

Alcohol-related Injury Deaths (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

11/26/2014

Data Owner

Substance Abuse Epidemiology, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N-1103, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Laura Tomedi, Alcohol Epidemiologist, by telephone at (505) 476-1757 or email to Laura.Tomedi@state.nm.us.




Drug Overdose Deaths: Drug Overdose Deaths per 100,000 Population, 2011-2015

  • Dona Ana County
    18.4
    95% Confidence Interval (15.6 - 21.2)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    24.7
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

New Mexico's drug overdose death rate has been one of the highest in the nation for most of the last two decades. New Mexico's death rate has more than tripled since 1990. While deaths due to illicit drugs have remained steady during the past decade, deaths due to prescription drugs (particularly opioid pain relievers) have increased dramatically. In addition to the high death rates, drug abuse is one of the most costly health problems in the U. S. In 2007, it was estimated that prescription opioid abuse, dependence, and misuse cost New Mexico $890 million. ^1^ [[br]][[br]] ---- {{class .SmallerFont # Based on a national methodology derived by Birnbaum et al. (2011). "Societal costs of opioid abuse, dependence, and misuse in the United States." Pain Medicine, 12(4):657-667. }}

How Are We Doing?

Drug use can result in overdose death and is also associated with other societal problems including crime, violence, homelessness, loss of productivity and spread of blood-borne disease such as HIV and hepatitis. Unintentional drug overdose is the largest subset of total drug overdose death, accounting for 80-85% of drug overdose deaths in New Mexico. The other substantial cause of drug overdose death is suicide, or intentional self-poisoning, which accounts for 10-15% of all total drug overdose death in New Mexico. Poisoning has been the leading cause of unintentional injury in New Mexico since 2007, surpassing motor vehicle crash deaths, largely as a result of increased unintentional drug overdose deaths associated with prescription drug use. During 2010-2014, 53% of drug overdose deaths were caused by prescription drugs, while 33% were caused by illicit drugs, and 14% involved both types. Medical examiner data indicate that the most common drugs causing unintentional overdose death for the period were prescription opioids (e.g., methadone, oxycodone, morphine 48%), heroin (34%), tranquilizers/muscle relaxants (23%), cocaine (17%), methamphetamine (16%) and antidepressants (12%) (not mutually exclusive). In New Mexico and nationally, overdose death from prescription opioids has become an issue of enormous concern. Interventions are currently being formulated, assessed and implemented in New Mexico and in communities across the country, and may be contributing to decreases in death in the most recent data available. Hispanic men had the highest total drug overdose death rate during 2010-2014. The rates of total drug overdose death and unintentional drug overdose death among men were roughly 1.5 times that of women. Among women, drug overdose death from prescription drugs was more common than from illicit drugs across the age range. Illicit drugs were the predominant drug type causing death among males across the age range, and the rates were highest among males aged 25-54 years.

Note

Age-adjusted to the US 2000 standard population. 

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Drug Overdose Deaths

Definition: Drug overdose death is defined as the number of deaths caused by drug overdose per 100,000 population. Drug overdose deaths are those in which drug overdose is the primary cause, whether unintentional or intentional. Includes ICD-10 codes X40-X44, X60-X64, X85, and Y10-Y14 for underlying cause of death.
Numerator: Number of drug overdose deaths in New Mexico
Denominator: New Mexico Population

Indicator Profile Report

Deaths due to Drug Overdose (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

03/10/2017

Data Owner

Substance Abuse Epidemiology, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N-1103, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Laura Tomedi, Alcohol Epidemiologist, by telephone at (505) 476-1757 or email to Laura.Tomedi@state.nm.us.




Cardiovascular Disease - Heart Disease Deaths: Deaths per 100,000 Population - Age Adjusted, 2014-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    120.4
    95% Confidence Interval (112.4 - 128.4)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    143.8
    U.S.
    168.5
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

In 2016, heart disease was the leading cause of death in New Mexico and accounts for over 20% of all deaths.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

Risk factors for heart disease include: high blood pressure, abnormal cholesterol, prediabetes, diabetes, tobacco use, secondhand smoke exposure, physical inactivity, poor nutrition and excess weight. Controlling and preventing these risk factors is crucial in reducing risk of developing heart disease as well as death from heart disease.

How Are We Doing?

Generally, overall heart disease death rates have been decreasing for decades. However, heart disease and cancer deaths remain the top two leading causes of death in NM and the US. Age and Sex. As is typical with chronic diseases, death rates increased as age increased, with a steep increase in the oldest age group (85+ years). The 2016 male rates were higher than female rates in each age group. Race/Ethnicity: Heart disease mortality varied greatly by race and ethnicity. During the 3-year period 2014-2016, the rate for Black or African Americans, 187.5 per 100,000, was statistically significantly higher than that of all other race/ethnic groups. The next highest rate, that of whites, 149.7 per 100,000, was statistically significantly different than all remaining race/ethnic groups. The rates for American Indians and Hispanics were essentially the same. The population with the lowest heart disease mortality rate was the Asian/Pacific Islander group, with a 3-year age-adjusted rate of 84.4 per 100,000. This rate was statistically significantly different from those of all other groups. County: During the period 2014-2016, heart disease mortality rate varied by county. The six counties with the highest rates, all above 200 per 100,000, were Sierra, Lea, Luna, Torrance, Chaves, and Curry counties. The six counties with the lowest rates, all below 120 per 100,000, were Taos, Mora, Los Alamos, Catron, Santa Fe, and Lincoln. Urban and Rural: NM counties were designated into four groups of urbanicity and rurality, using the National Center for Health Statistics classification scheme. For 2014-2016, heart disease mortality rates were highest and similar in Mixed Urban/Rural and Rural counties, and lowest in Metro and Small Metro counties. The heart disease mortality rate for Small Metro counties was statistically significantly lower than all other Urban/Rural categories.

What Is Being Done?

The NM Department of Health Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention (HDSP) Program works with health systems, health care providers, community partners, agencies and coalitions to provide awareness of and education about heart disease and stroke prevention strategies. Program strategies are focused on providing professional education to members of the health care team about the importance of reporting standardized hypertension and diabetes quality measures to reporting bodies using electronic health record (EHR) data; partnering with EHR data experts to provide technical assistance to health systems on how to extract necessary data from the EHR to be able to report quality measures; working with health systems to identify potential errors in entering EHR data that may affect quality reporting; using EHR data to identify patients with undiagnosed hypertension commonly referred to as those ?hiding in plain sight;? partnering with the NM Department of Health Diabetes Prevention and Control Program (DPCP) to provide resources and programs for patients to manage their hypertension and diabetes; promoting the value of community health workers as members of the healthcare team; promoting and educating about the importance of using a team-based healthcare model; partnering with NM Medicaid to extract and analyze prescription fill data for diabetes and hypertensive medications; use Million Hearts and American Heart Association resources to promote and educate about self-measured blood pressure monitoring tied with clinical support. The HDSP program's partners support build environment improvements so people at risk for or with cardiovascular disease and stroke can be physically active and initiatives that increase access to healthy foods. The HDSP program consults with populations that are disproportionately affected by cardiovascular disease and stroke and/or those that serve them to develop education and services that are culturally appropriate to these populations.

Evidence-based Practices

Evidence-based community health improvement ideas and interventions may be found at the following sites: - The Guide to Community Preventive Services - Health Indicators Warehouse - County Health Rankings - Healthy People 2020 Website Heart Disease and its complications can be prevented and managed through these strategies: # Clinical decision-support systems designed to assist healthcare providers in implementing clinical guidelines at the point of care. # Reducing out-of-pocket costs (ROPC) for patients with high blood pressure and high cholesterol. # Team-Based Care to Improve Blood Pressure Control. CDC recommends specific major activities to implement these three effective strategies. 1) Clinical decision-support systems (CDSS) designed to assist healthcare providers in implementing clinical guidelines at the point of care. * Implementation of CDSS at clinics and sites that provide healthcare services along with providing technical assistance on proper use of these systems. * CDSS for cardiovascular disease prevention (CVD) include one or more of the following: ** Reminders for overdue CVD preventive services including screening for risk factors such as high blood pressure, diabetes, and high cholesterol ** Assessments of patients' risk for developing CVD based on their medical history, symptoms, and clinical test results ** Recommendations for evidence-based treatments to prevent CVD, including intensification of treatment ** Recommendations for health behavior changes to discuss with patients such as quitting smoking, increasing physical activity, and reducing excessive salt intake ** Alerts when indicators for CVD risk factors are not at goal[[br]] 2) Reducing out-of-pocket costs (ROPC) for patients with high blood pressure and high cholesterol. * Reducing out-of-pocket costs involves program and policy changes that make cardiovascular disease preventive services more affordable. These services include: ** Medications ** Behavioral counseling (e.g. nutrition counseling) ** Behavioral support (e.g. community-based weight management programs, gym membership) * Encouraging the delivery of preventive services in clinical and non-clinical settings (e.g. worksite, community). * Promoting interventions that enhance patient-provider interaction such as team-based care, medication counseling, and patient education. * Increasing awareness of covered services to providers and to patients with high blood pressure and high cholesterol using targeted messages. * Work with diabetes management and tobacco cessation programs to coordinate coverage for blood pressure and cholesterol management. [[br]] 3) Team-Based Care to Improve Blood Pressure Control. * Team-based care to improve blood pressure control is a health systems-level, organizational intervention that incorporates a multidisciplinary team to improve the quality of hypertension care for patients. * Provide technical assistance to facilitate communication and coordination of care support among various team members including the patient, the patient?s primary care provider, nurses, pharmacists, dietitians, social workers, and community health workers. * Enhance the use of evidence-based guidelines by team members. * Actively engage patients and populations at risk in their own care by providing educational materials, medication adherence support, and tools and resources for self-management (including health behavior change).

Healthy People Objective HDS-2:

Reduce coronary heart disease deaths
U.S. Target: 103.4 deaths per 100,000 population

Note

Heart disease mortality is defined as circulatory, Heart disease (ICD10: I00-I09, I11, I13, I20-I51). Some rows in data tables may include a note of Unstable or Very Unstable. Those rates labeled Unstable were statistically unstable (RSE >0.30 and <0.50), and may fluctuate widely across time periods due to random variation (chance). Those rates labeled Very Unstable were extremely unstable (RSE >0.50). These values should not be used to infer population risk.  Data have been directly age-adjusted to the U.S. 2000 standard population. Some rows in data tables may include a note of Unstable or Very Unstable. Those rates labeled Unstable were statistically unstable (RSE >0.30 and <0.50), and may fluctuate widely across time periods due to random variation (chance). Those rates labeled Very Unstable were extremely unstable (RSE >0.50). These values should not be used to infer population risk. Some Very Unstable rates have been suppressed.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.   U.S. Data Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/.  

Measure Description for Cardiovascular Disease - Heart Disease Deaths

Definition: Diseases of the heart include a variety of conditions that may affect different parts of the heart, including the blood supply, the heart muscle, the internal lining and valves, the conduction system, and the membrane that surrounds the heart. Common causes of death from diseases of the heart include myocardial infarction (heart attack), heart failure, and cardiac arrest.
Numerator: Number of heart disease deaths
Denominator: New Mexico Population

Indicator Profile Report

Heart Disease Deaths per 100,000 Population (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/10/2017

Data Owner

Heart Disease & Stroke Prevention Program, Chronic Disease Prevention and Control Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health, Public Health Division, 5301 Central Ave. NE, Suite 800, Albuquerque, NM 87108, Telephone: (505) 841-5840. For inquiries, contact the Medical Director/Epidemiologist, Susan Baum, MD, MPH (email: susan.baum@state.nm.us).




Cardiovascular Disease - Stroke Deaths: Deaths per 100,000 Population - Age Adjusted, 2014-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    31.3
    95% Confidence Interval (27.2 - 35.5)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    33.8
    U.S.
    37.6
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

In 2016, stroke was the fifth leading cause of death in New Mexico.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

Risk factors for stroke include: high blood pressure, abnormal cholesterol, prediabetes, diabetes, tobacco use, physical inactivity, poor nutrition and excess weight. Controlling and preventing these risk factors is crucial in reducing risk of developing cerebrovascular disease as well as death from stroke.

How Are We Doing?

US and NM: In general, stroke death rates have decreased in the last 15 years in the US. In New Mexico, stroke mortality rates declined beginning in 2004 and remained relatively stable through 2011, with another slight decline in 2012 and 2013. In the most recent year, 2016, there has been a slight increase in the stroke mortality rate over 2012 and 2013. Age and Sex: There was no significant difference in stroke mortality rates by sex. Stroke mortality is strongly associated with age for both sexes. The stroke mortality rates were significantly higher for older age groups. For both sexes, from the age group 25-34, the stroke mortality rate for each age group was significantly higher than that of the next younger age group. Race/Ethnicity and Sex: There were no significant differences between Race/Ethnic groups. Among males, the stroke mortality rate of White males was lower than that of American Indian and Hispanic males. There were no significant differences by Race/Ethnicity among females. Within each Race/Ethnic group, there were no differences between the male and female rates. County: County rates ranged from 17.7 to 53.0 stroke deaths per 100,000 persons. The stroke mortality rates for Grant and Los Alamos counties were significantly lower than the rate for the state, as a whole. The stroke mortality rate for Luna County was significantly higher than the rate for the state, as a whole. Urban and Rural: All the rates within Urban and rural counties were statistically similar.

What Is Being Done?

The NM Department of Health Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention (HDSP) Program works with health systems, health care providers, community partners, agencies and coalitions to provide awareness of and education about heart disease and stroke prevention strategies. Program strategies are focused on providing professional education to members of the health care team about the importance of reporting standardized hypertension and diabetes quality measures to reporting bodies using electronic health record (EHR) data; partnering with EHR data experts to provide technical assistance to health systems on how to extract necessary data from the EHR to be able to report quality measures; working with health systems to identify potential errors in entering EHR data that may affect quality reporting; using EHR data to identify patients with undiagnosed hypertension commonly referred to as those "hiding in plain sight"; partnering with the NM Department of Health Diabetes Prevention and Control Program (DPCP) to provide resources and programs for patients to manage their hypertension and diabetes; promoting the value of community health workers as members of the healthcare team; promoting and educating about the importance of using a team-based healthcare model; partnering with NM Medicaid to extract and analyze prescription fill data for diabetes and hypertensive medications; use Million Hearts and American Heart Association resources to promote and educate about self-measured blood pressure monitoring tied with clinical support. The HDSP program's partners support build environment improvements so people at risk for or with cardiovascular disease and stroke can be physically active and initiatives that increase access to healthy foods. The HDSP program consults with populations that are disproportionately affected by cardiovascular disease and stroke and/or those that serve them to develop education and services that are culturally appropriate to these populations.

Evidence-based Practices

Evidence-based community health improvement ideas and interventions may be found at the following sites: - The Guide to Community Preventive Services - Health Indicators Warehouse - County Health Rankings - Healthy People 2020 Website Stroke and its complications can be prevented and managed through these strategies: # Clinical decision-support systems designed to assist healthcare providers in implementing clinical guidelines at the point of care. # Reducing out-of-pocket costs (ROPC) for patients with high blood pressure and high cholesterol. # Team-Based Care to Improve Blood Pressure Control. CDC recommends specific major activities to implement these three effective strategies. 1) Clinical decision-support systems (CDSS) designed to assist healthcare providers in implementing clinical guidelines at the point of care. * Implementation of CDSS at clinics and sites that provide healthcare services along with providing technical assistance on proper use of these systems. * CDSS for cardiovascular disease prevention (CVD) include one or more of the following: ** Reminders for overdue CVD preventive services including screening for risk factors such as high blood pressure, diabetes, and high cholesterol ** Assessments of patients' risk for developing CVD based on their medical history, symptoms, and clinical test results ** Recommendations for evidence-based treatments to prevent CVD, including intensification of treatment ** Recommendations for health behavior changes to discuss with patients such as quitting smoking, increasing physical activity, and reducing excessive salt intake ** Alerts when indicators for CVD risk factors are not at goal[[br]] 2) Reducing out-of-pocket costs (ROPC) for patients with high blood pressure and high cholesterol. * Reducing out-of-pocket costs involves program and policy changes that make cardiovascular disease preventive services more affordable. These services include: ** Medications ** Behavioral counseling (e.g. nutrition counseling) ** Behavioral support (e.g. community-based weight management programs, gym membership) * Encouraging the delivery of preventive services in clinical and non-clinical settings (e.g. worksite, community). * Promoting interventions that enhance patient-provider interaction such as team-based care, medication counseling, and patient education. * Increasing awareness of covered services to providers and to patients with high blood pressure and high cholesterol using targeted messages. * Work with diabetes management and tobacco cessation programs to coordinate coverage for blood pressure and cholesterol management. [[br]] 3) Team-Based Care to Improve Blood Pressure Control. * Team-based care to improve blood pressure control is a health systems-level, organizational intervention that incorporates a multidisciplinary team to improve the quality of hypertension care for patients. * Provide technical assistance to facilitate communication and coordination of care support among various team members including the patient, the patient?s primary care provider, nurses, pharmacists, dietitians, social workers, and community health workers. * Enhance the use of evidence-based guidelines by team members. * Actively engage patients and populations at risk in their own care by providing educational materials, medication adherence support, and tools and resources for self-management (including health behavior change).

Healthy People Objective HDS-3:

Reduce stroke deaths
U.S. Target: 34.8 deaths per 100,000 population

Note

Stroke deaths include deaths with underlying cause of cerebrovascular disease, include ICD-10 codes I60-I69. Most estimates are based on a 3-year period, 2014-2016. Most estimates have been age-adjusted to the year 2000 U.S. census. Estimates by age group have not been age-adjusted. Some rows in data tables may include a note of Unstable or Very Unstable. Those rates labeled Unstable were statistically unstable (RSE greater than or equal to 0.30 and less than 0.50), and may fluctuate widely across time periods due to random variation (chance). Those rates labeled Very Unstable were extremely unstable (RSE greater than or equal to 0.50). These values should not be used to infer population risk. Some Very Unstable rates may have been suppressed.  3-year estimates. Data have been directly age-adjusted to the U.S. 2000 standard population.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.   U.S. Data Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/.  

Measure Description for Cardiovascular Disease - Stroke Deaths

Definition: Stroke Deaths per 100,000 population in New Mexico
Numerator: Number of stroke deaths
Denominator: New Mexico population

Indicator Profile Report

Stroke Deaths per 100,00 Population (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/19/2017

Data Owner

Heart Disease & Stroke Prevention Program, Chronic Disease Prevention and Control Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health, Public Health Division, 5301 Central Ave. NE, Suite 800, Albuquerque, NM 87108, Telephone: (505) 841-5840. For inquiries, contact the Medical Director/Epidemiologist, Susan Baum, MD, MPH (email: susan.baum@state.nm.us).




Diabetes Deaths: Age-adjusted Diabetes Deaths per 100,000 Population, 2014-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    23.7
    95% Confidence Interval (20.0 - 27.4)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    26.2
    U.S.
    21.3
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

In 2016, diabetes was the 6th leading cause of death for New Mexicans and the 7th leading cause in the U.S. Diabetes complications, which are costly to individuals, families and to society, include premature death, cardiovascular disease, blindness, end stage kidney disease, and lower extremity amputations. People with diabetes are two to four times more likely to develop cardiovascular disease and stroke; about 65% of deaths in people with diabetes nationwide are due to these conditions. Costs of diabetes extend beyond medical costs, such as costs due to lower productivity, disability and loss of productive life due to premature death, and care-taking by family members. Effective and accessible diabetes prevention and management programs and resources are necessary to reverse the increasing rates of diabetes in our communities and reduce diabetes complications.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

Many interconnected risk factors contribute to diabetes-related deaths in complex ways. They range from the environmental context/population-based determinants of health such as poverty or living/working in certain geographic areas, to behaviors related to disease management. It must be noted that personal behaviors are strongly dependent on the broader environmental context mentioned above. For example, it is difficult to eat a nutritious diet if one doesn't have access to affordable healthy foods.

How Are We Doing?

Death rates for both New Mexico and the US are far below the HP 2020 target of 66.6 deaths per 100,000 population. New Mexico age-adjusted diabetes death rate in 2016 was 26.7/100,000, down from 34.6/100,000 in 2003. National age-adjusted rates have been lower, 25.5/100,000 in 2003 and 21.3/100,000 in 2015, the most recent year available. The number of New Mexico diabetes deaths (i.e., numerator) ranged from a low of 500 in 2000 to a high of 671 deaths in 2016. From 2000 to 2016, an annual average of 609 diabetes deaths occurred, with a total of 10,357 diabetes deaths. The female rates were lower than the male rates for all age groups. Race/Ethnicity Rates: During the period 2014-2016, the New Mexico American Indian population had the highest diabetes death rates and the White had the lowest diabetes death rate. The American Indian rate was roughly double the rates of Black/African American and Hispanic populations, nearly three times that of the Asian/Pacific Islander population, and four times that of the White population. When looking at the race/ethnicity rates by sex, male rates are higher than female rates in all groups except Asian/Pacific Islander, where there was no significant difference. Among males, the American Indian/Alaska Native rate was four times, and the Black/African American rate was two times, higher than the White rate. The American Indian rate was two times higher than the Hispanic rate and the Black/African American rate. Among females, the American Indian/Alaska Native rate was almost five times higher than the White rate, and two times higher than the Hispanic rate. The Hispanic female rate, as with the male rate, was twice the White rate. All these differences are statistically significant. Urban/Rural: Counties were categorized into Metropolitan, Small Metropolitan, Mixed Urban-Rural and Rural. In 2014-2016, the Mixed Urban-Rural diabetes death rate was the highest and the Metropolitan rate the lowest. The Mixed Urban-Rural rate was 39% higher than that of the Metropolitan rate. The rates for Rural and Mixed Urban-Rural were not statistically different.

What Is Being Done?

The NM Department of Health Diabetes Prevention and Control Program (DPCP) works with health care providers and community partners, agencies and coalitions to provide multiple diabetes prevention and management services and programs. Services and programs include: professional development trainings and resources for diabetes prevention and management; the National Diabetes Prevention Program (National DPP), a proven community-based physical activity and nutrition intervention to prevent or delay diabetes in persons at high risk; community resources to help people manage their diabetes through skill building, such as the Chronic Disease Self-Management and Diabetes Self-Management Education Programs; Kitchen Creations cooking schools; and health system disease management interventions that improve blood glucose, blood pressure, and cholesterol. The DPCP provides education, information, and resources about prediabetes and diabetes, particularly to health care providers, to increase screening, testing and referral to prevention and management programs. This includes a centralized referral and data system that helps providers easily make referrals to the above programs. DPCP?s partners support built environment improvements so people at risk for or with diabetes can be physically active and initiatives that increase access to healthy foods. Both are essential components of effective population-based diabetes prevention and control. The DPCP consults with populations that are disproportionately affected by diabetes and/or those that serve them to develop programs and services that are culturally appropriate for these populations.

Evidence-based Practices

Diabetes and its complications can be prevented, delayed and/or managed through participation in evidence-based programs, including the National Diabetes Prevention Program or NDPP (provided in a clinical, community, or web-based setting), the Diabetes Self-Management Education Program or DSMEP (provided in a community or web-based setting), and Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support programs or DSME/S (usually provided in a clinical setting). Improving the quality of clinical care for people with and at risk for diabetes is also an evidence-based practice. The following DPCP activities are in alignment with these accepted programs and practices: 1. Increase use of the NDPP to prevent or delay onset of type 2 diabetes among people at high risk by raising awareness about prediabetes and the NDPP, increasing delivery sites, facilitating the screening and referral process, and working to obtain health insurance coverage (including Medicaid) for the program. 2. Increase access to sustainable self-management education and support services (DSMEP and DSME/S) to improve control of A1C, blood pressure, and cholesterol, and to promote tobacco cessation, by increasing delivery sites, facilitating the referral process, and working to obtain health insurance coverage (including Medicaid) for the programs. 3. Implement evidence-based worksite programs and policies that help people prevent or manage diabetes and related chronic conditions, promote tobacco cessation, and help employees improve control of their A1C, blood pressure, and cholesterol. 4. Improve health outcomes for people with and at risk for diabetes by supporting health care organizations to improve quality of care through use of the Planned Care Model, Patient Centered Medical Home, and Electronic Health Record. Within these organizations, support policy and protocol implementation that institutionalize and help sustain quality care improvements. 5. Promote the sustainability of Community Health Workers (CHWs) involved in providing diabetes prevention and management services.

Healthy People Objective D-5.1:

Reduce the proportion of the diabetic population with an A1c value greater than 9percent
U.S. Target: 14.6 percent

Note

Age-adjusted to U.S. 2000 population, except for rates by age group. Diabetes deaths include those with ICD10 codes E10 - E14 and as underlying cause of death.  Some rows in data tables may include a note of Unstable or Very Unstable. Those rates labeled Unstable were statistically unstable (RSE >0.30 and <0.50), and may fluctuate widely across time periods due to random variation (chance). Those rates labeled Very Unstable were extremely unstable (RSE >0.50). These values should not be used to infer population risk. Some Very Unstable rates have been suppressed.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Diabetes Deaths

Definition: The diabetes death rate: the number of deaths attributed to diabetes per 100,000 people, age-adjusted to the 2000 U.S. population.
Numerator: Number of deaths among New Mexico residents due to diabetes as the underlying cause of death.
Denominator: Estimated total number (population) of New Mexico residents.

Indicator Profile Report

Diabetes Death Rates (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/08/2017

Data Owner

Diabetes Prevention and Control Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 810 W. San Mateo Road, Suite 200E, Santa Fe, NM 87505, Judith Gabriele, Program Manager, (505) 476-7613 judith.gabriele@state.nm.us; Corazon Halasan, Epidemiologist, (505) 476-7617 corazon.halasan@state.nm.us Toll free: 1-888-523-2966




Diabetes Hospitalizations: Hospital Discharges per 10,000 Population, 3-Year Age-adjusted Rolling Averages, 2007-2014

  • Dona Ana County
    **
    95% Confidence Interval DNA
    Statistical StabilityDNA
    New MexicoDNA
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
    **=Insufficient data.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Hospitalization is costly for individuals, families and society. Based on 2012 American Diabetes Association estimates, direct medical as well as nonmedical costs for diagnosed diabetes and undiagnosed diabetes were about $1.8 billion in New Mexico alone. This 2012 estimate includes the costs of hospitalization, office visits, prescription medications, inability to work due to disability, reduced productivity at work, and lost productivity capacity due to early mortality. This does not include costs due to prediabetes, over the counter medications, prevention programs, research programs, and productivity loss for informal caregivers. Diabetes hospitalizations are considered potentially preventable hospitalizations, that is, some proportion of these inpatient stays are preventable. According to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), "with high-quality, community-based primary care, hospitalization for these illnesses often can be avoided". AHRQ includes diabetes as one such illness. Key prevention strategies include regular physical activity and healthy nutrition; effective self-management; regular and effective management support; and, access to specialty or ambulatory care as appropriate. Environmental prevention strategies include accessible and affordable vegetables and fruits; readily accessible safe places for physical activity; and school, work and community cultures visibly supporting physical activity for all ages and abilities. To accomplish this there is a role for all sectors, from families to businesses to health systems to government. One public health role is to build supports, structures and conditions that make it easy for as many people as possible to be active, to eat a healthy diet daily, and to access primary care when needed. A vital part of this role is linking clinical systems with community supports, such as the National Diabetes Prevention Program, MyCD (chronic disease self-management programs), diabetes self-management education, and other community-based prevention programs.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

Many inter-related risk factors contribute to diabetes-related hospitalizations, ranging from individual behaviors to socio-economic and environmental conditions that influence individual behavior. Individual behaviors include inadequate physical activity, poor nutrition/unhealthy eating, and not maintaining a healthy weight. Critical social and environmental factors include poverty, lack of safe public places for physical activity, community norms that do not encourage regular or daily physical activity, schools and work sites that do not actively support healthy behaviors, and healthy food and effective treatments that are not routinely accessible.

How Are We Doing?

The first chart shows diabetes discharge rates for the first-listed (primary) diagnosis and for any-listed diagnosis for NM and the US, and give a general view of diabetes hospitalization. NM rates for diabetes as a primary diagnosis were, except for two years, generally stable from 2000 to 2008. An upward trend from 2009 to 2013 is not clearly evident in this graph, due to the scale of the vertical axis. However, this latter period had higher rates than the earlier 2000-2008 period. The 14-year trend for diabetes as any-listed diagnosis shows an overall rising trend. The later rates, from 2008 to 2013, were statistically higher than the earlier 2000-2007 rates. At 127 to 138 diabetes hospitalizations per 10,000 persons, these later rates are a distinct break from the earlier rates of 111 to 119 diabetes hospitalizations per 10,000 persons. During 2008 to 2013 in NM, a total of 157,979 diabetes-related hospitalizations occurred. Of this total, 17, 670 (10%) were discharges in which diabetes was the primary diagnosis and 157,979 (90%) were discharges in which diabetes was a contributing diagnosis. Annually, an average of 2,945 diabetes discharges were those in which diabetes was a primary diagnosis, and an average of 26,330 discharges were those in which diabetes was a contributing diagnosis. RATES by AGE: Two graphs show trends of diabetes hospitalization for age groups 15-44, 45-64, and 65+. One graph shows the trend for diabetes as primary diagnosis; the second graph shows the trend for diabetes as any-listed diagnosis. As age increases, diabetes hospitalization rates increase; the rates for the 65+ age group are highest while the rates for the 15-44 age group are lowest. Rates for the 15 to 44 age group show increasing trends, for the primary diagnosis discharges and the any-listed diagnoses discharges. These trends are statistically significant. The percent change from 2000 to 2013 was 100% for the first-listed diagnosis (7.6 to 15.2) and 70% for the any-listed diagnosis (29.6 to 50.3). These percent increases for the 15-44 group were by far the largest of the three age groups. The average number of diabetes discharges per year, among primary diagnosis discharges, was 848 discharges for ages 15 to 44; 923 discharges for ages 45 to 64; and, 695 discharges for ages 65 and older. Among the any-listed diagnoses discharges, the average number of diabetes discharges per year were 3,315 for ages 15 to 44; 9,051 for ages 45 to 64; and, 12,574 for ages 65 and older. RATES by REGION: Graphs of diabetes hospitalizations show rates for primary diagnosis and for any-listed diagnosis by the five NM Health Regions. Each region has its own unique mix of factors which influence hospital and provider practice and make it tricky to compare across regions. Secondly, the lack of Indian Health Service (which affects the Northwest, Metro, and Northeast Regions) and Veterans Affairs (which affects Metro Region) records each year means some regional rates may be higher than what is shown. Only comparisons of rates across time within a region will be made. Five years of regional rates are shown. The 2013 Northwest Region rate for diabetes as primary diagnosis was higher than the rates for the previous three years (2010 through 2012). The 2013 Metro Region rate was higher than the 2009 rate, but statistically similar to the 2010 through 2012 rates. There was been an apparent upward (though not borne out statistically) creep each year since 2009; it has been only the fifth year, 2013, that the Metro rate is statistically higher than the first year, 2009. Among the rates for diabetes as any-listed diagnosis, the 2013 Northwest rate was higher than the 2009 and 2010 rates, but similar to the 2011 and 2012 rates. The 2013 Metro rate was higher than rates of the previous four years (2009 to 2012). The 2011 to 2013 Southwest rates were lower than the 2009 rate.

What Is Being Done?

The NM Department of Health Diabetes Prevention and Control Program (DPCP) works with health care providers and community partners, agencies and coalitions to provide multiple diabetes prevention and management services and programs. Services and programs include: professional development trainings and resources for diabetes prevention and management; the National Diabetes Prevention Program (National DPP), a proven community-based physical activity and nutrition intervention to prevent or delay diabetes in persons at high risk; community resources to help people manage their diabetes through skill building, such as the Chronic Disease Self-Management and Diabetes Self-Management Education Programs; Kitchen Creations cooking schools; and health system disease management interventions that improve blood glucose, blood pressure, and cholesterol. The DPCP provides education, information, and resources about prediabetes and diabetes, particularly to health care providers, to increase screening, testing and referral to prevention and management programs. This includes a centralized referral and data system that helps providers easily make referrals to the above programs. DPCP?s partners support built environment improvements so people at risk for or with diabetes can be physically active and initiatives that increase access to healthy foods. Both are essential components of effective population-based diabetes prevention and control. The DPCP consults with populations that are disproportionately affected by diabetes and/or those that serve them to develop programs and services that are culturally appropriate for these populations.

Evidence-based Practices

Diabetes and its complications can be prevented, delayed and/or managed through participation in evidence-based programs, including the National Diabetes Prevention Program or NDPP (provided in a clinical, community, or web-based setting), the Diabetes Self-Management Education Program or DSMEP (provided in a community or web-based setting), and Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support programs or DSME/S (usually provided in a clinical setting). Improving the quality of clinical care for people with and at risk for diabetes is also an evidence-based practice. The following DPCP activities are in alignment with these accepted programs and practices: 1. Increase use of the NDPP to prevent or delay onset of type 2 diabetes among people at high risk by raising awareness about prediabetes and the NDPP, increasing delivery sites, facilitating the screening and referral process, and working to obtain health insurance coverage (including Medicaid) for the program. 2. Increase access to sustainable self-management education and support services (DSMEP and DSME/S) to improve control of A1C, blood pressure, and cholesterol, and to promote tobacco cessation, by increasing delivery sites, facilitating the referral process, and working to obtain health insurance coverage (including Medicaid) for the programs. 3. Implement evidence-based worksite programs and policies that help people prevent or manage diabetes and related chronic conditions, promote tobacco cessation, and help employees improve control of their A1C, blood pressure, and cholesterol. 4. Improve health outcomes for people with and at risk for diabetes by supporting health care organizations to improve quality of care through use of the Planned Care Model, Patient Centered Medical Home, and Electronic Health Record. Within these organizations, support policy and protocol implementation that institutionalize and help sustain quality care improvements. 5. Promote the sustainability of Community Health Workers (CHWs) involved in providing diabetes prevention and management services.

Healthy People Objective D-5.1:

Reduce the proportion of the diabetic population with an A1c value greater than 9percent
U.S. Target: 14.6 percent

Note

Diseases listed on hospital discharge records are assigned specific ICD codes. Under the ICD, the primary condition/ disease leading to the hospitalization is listed first. There may also be up to eight additional conditions which contributed to the hospitalization, for a total of nine possible conditions. These data are based on the ICD codes listed on the hospital discharge records, and thus are about the number of discharges, not the number of persons hospitalized, over the course of the year. This means a person admitted to a hospital multiple times over the year will be counted each time as a separate discharge from the hospital. Except for age-specific rates, rates are age-adjusted to the 2000 US Standard Populations.  Some rows in this data table include a note of Unstable or Very Unstable. Those rates labeled Unstable were statistically unstable (RSE >0.30 and <0.50), and may fluctuate widely across time periods due to random variation (chance). Those rates labeled Very Unstable were extremely unstable (RSE >0.50). These values should not be used to infer population risk. Some rates that were Very Unstable have been suppressed.

Data Sources

Hospital Inpatient Discharge Data, New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Diabetes Hospitalizations

Definition: The number of hospital inpatient discharges per 10,000 persons where diabetes, ICD9-CM codes 250.0 - 250.9, was either the primary or a contributing condition.
Numerator: Number of diabetes-related hospital discharges within a given year. Discharges are grouped as "any-listed" and "first-listed". "Any-listed" discharges are all discharges in which diabetes was one of the nine possible diagnoses listed for the hospitalizations. "First-listed" (or primary) discharges include only the discharges in which diabetes was the first diagnosis listed (coded) for the hospitalizations. Numerator data are from the NM Hospital Inpatient Discharge Database of the NM Department of Health.
Denominator: Number of NM residents in a given year who belong within the specified geographic or age group.

Indicator Profile Report

Hospitalizations with Diabetes (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/09/2017

Data Owner

Diabetes Prevention and Control Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 810 W. San Mateo Road, Suite 200E, Santa Fe, NM 87505, Judith Gabriele, Program Manager, (505) 476-7613 judith.gabriele@state.nm.us; Corazon Halasan, Epidemiologist, (505) 476-7617 corazon.halasan@state.nm.us Toll free: 1-888-523-2966




Cancer Deaths - Breast Cancer: Age-adjusted Breast Cancer Deaths per 100,000 Females, 2012-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    17.7
    95% Confidence Interval (14.3 - 21.1)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    18.7
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Among New Mexican women, breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer, and is the second leading cause of death from cancer.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, risk factors for breast cancer include: older age (>50 years); genetic mutations (e.g., BRCA1 and BRCA2); early age at menstruation (<12 years); no or late (>30 years) pregnancy; late age at menopause (>55 years); lack of physical activity; being overweight or obese after menopause; having dense breasts; using combination hormone therapy (i.e., estrogen and progestin together); taking oral contraceptives; personal or family history of breast cancer; personal history of certain non-cancerous breast diseases (e.g., atypical hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ); previous radiation therapy to chest or breasts (e.g., like for treatment of Hodgkin's lymphoma) before age 30 years; alcohol consumption. Women who took diethylstilbestrol (DES) during pregnancy and women whose mothers took DES are also at increased risk for breast cancer.

How Are We Doing?

The rate of death from breast cancer among New Mexican women has declined over the past two decades.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (BCCP) is dedicated to decreasing rates of breast cancer deaths by improving access to high-quality, age-appropriate breast cancer screening and diagnostic services for low-income women who are uninsured or under-insured, and helping them access resources for treatment when necessary. To do this, the BCCP supports changes within provider practices and health systems to increase screening opportunities. In addition, data and surveillance systems, such as monitoring screening quality measures, are used to develop more organized, systematic approaches to cancer screening and to improve service delivery. These approaches are supported by the New Mexico Department of Health and are being implemented by many healthcare organizations and health systems throughout New Mexico. Visit the BCCP website at: http://archive.cancernm.org/bcc/index.html

Evidence-based Practices

The BCCP supports New Mexico health care providers and health systems in using evidence-based interventions such as patient reminders, risk assessment tools, reducing structural barriers (e.g., expanding clinic hours, provision of mobile mammography events), provider reminder and recall systems, and provider assessment and feedback on performance. All of these activities have been shown to increase breast cancer screening rates, and are recommended by The Guide to Community Preventive Services, a collection of evidence-based findings of the Community Preventive Services Task Force, established by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Healthy People Objective C-3:

Reduce the female breast cancer death rate
U.S. Target: 20.6 deaths per 100,000 females

Note

Breast cancer mortality is defined as a neoplasm, malignant, of breast (ICD10: C50).  Data have been directly age-adjusted to the U.S. 2000 standard population. *This rate is statistically unstable (RSE >0.30), and may fluctuate widely across time periods due to random variation (chance). **This rate is extremely unstable (RSE >0.50) and should not be used to infer population risk. ***The count or rate in certain cells of the table has been suppressed either because 1) the observed number of events is very small and not appropriate for publication, or 2) it could be used to calculate the number in a cell that has been suppressed.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Cancer Deaths - Breast Cancer

Definition: Female Breast Cancer Deaths per 100,000 population (females) in New Mexico
Numerator: Number of breast cancer deaths
Denominator: New Mexico female population

Indicator Profile Report

Average Annual Female Breast Cancer Deaths per 100,000 Females (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/17/2017

Data Owner

Cancer Prevention and Control Section, Chronic Disease Prevention and Control Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health, Public Health Division, 5301 Central Ave. NE, Suite 800, Albuquerque, NM 87108, Telephone: (505) 841-5840. For data inquiries, contact the Cancer Section Epidemiologist, Libby Bruggeman, PhD, MA (email: Libby.Bruggeman@state.nm.us) or the Medical Officer/Epidemiologist, Susan Baum, MD, MPH (email: susan.baum@state.nm.us).




Cancer Deaths - Lung Cancer: Age-adjusted Lung Cancer Deaths per 100,000 Population, 2012-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    31.8
    95% Confidence Interval (28.6 - 35.1)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    29.3
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Among New Mexicans, lung cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in both men and women, and is the leading cause of cancer death overall. Approximately 90% of lung cancer cases in men and 80% in women are attributable to cigarette smoking (New Mexico Cancer Plan 2012-2017).

Risk and Resiliency Factors

Smoking is by far the leading risk factor for lung cancer. At least 80% of lung cancer deaths are thought to result from smoking. The risk for lung cancer among smokers is many times higher than among non-smokers. The longer you smoke and the more packs a day you smoke, the greater your risk. Cigar smoking and pipe smoking are almost as likely to cause lung cancer as cigarette smoking. Smoking low-tar or light cigarettes increases lung cancer risk as much as regular cigarettes. There is concern that menthol cigarettes may increase the risk even more since the menthol allows smokers to inhale more deeply. Even if you don't smoke, breathing in the smoke of others (called secondhand smoke) can increase your risk of developing lung cancer by almost 30%. Workers who have been exposed to tobacco smoke in the workplace are also more likely to get lung cancer. Secondhand smoke is thought to cause more than 7,000 deaths from lung cancer each year. After smoking, the next highest risk for lung cancer comes from exposure to radon. Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas created by the breakdown of uranium in soil and rocks and cannot be seen, tasted, or smelled. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, radon is the leading cause of lung cancer among non-smokers. However, the risk from radon is much higher in people who smoke than in those who don't. There are other cancer-causing agents found in some work places that can increase lung cancer risk and include: asbestos; radioactive ores such as uranium; and inhaled chemicals or minerals such as arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, silica, vinyl chloride, nickel compounds, chromium compounds, coal products, mustard gas, chloromethyl ethers, and diesel exhaust. A few other factors that can influence a person's risk for lung cancer include: air pollution, radiation therapy to the lungs, arsenic in drinking water, certain dietary supplements, and a personal or family history of lung cancer. Source: American Cancer Society

How Are We Doing?

The rate of death from lung cancer in New Mexico rose slightly during the 1980s, stabilized in the early 1990s, and has generally decreased in the most recent years.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Department of Health's Tobacco Use Prevention and Control (TUPAC) Program and its partners use a comprehensive, evidence-based approach to promote healthy lifestyles that are free from tobacco abuse and addiction among all New Mexicans. TUPAC follows recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and works with communities, schools, and organizations across the state to implement activities and services that decrease the harmful and addictive use of commercial tobacco. Activities include: tobacco-free public high school and post-secondary campuses policy development, smoke-free multi-unit housing, point-of-sale marketing strategies, tobacco cessation services, public awareness and education campaigns, and initiatives to reduce health disparities. Other key tobacco prevention and control activities in the state are funded through the Department of Indian Affairs and the Human Services Department (Synar and FDA Programs).

Evidence-based Practices

Addressing tobacco use is best done through a coordinated effort to establish tobacco-free policies and social norms, to promote quitting tobacco and assist tobacco users in quitting, and to prevent initiation of tobacco use. This comprehensive approach combines educational, clinical, regulatory, economic, and social strategies. Research has documented strong or sufficient evidence in the use of the following strategies: - Increasing the unit price of tobacco products. - Restricting minors' access to tobacco products, and by restricting the time, place, and manner in which tobacco is marketed and sold. - Strategic, culturally appropriate, and high impact health communication messages (mass media), including paid TV, radio, billboard, print, and web-based advertising at state and local levels. - Ensuring that all patients seen in the health care system are screened for tobacco use, receive brief interventions to help them quit, and are offered more intensive counseling and low- or no-cost cessation medications. - Providing insurance coverage for tobacco use treatment, and phone- and web-based cessation services are effective and can reach large numbers of tobacco users. - Passage of laws and policies in a comprehensive tobacco control effort to protect the public from secondhand exposure. To potentially prevent some lung cancer deaths through early detection and treatment, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends annual screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) in adults aged 55 to 80 years who have a 30 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. Screening should be discontinued once a person has not smoked for 15 years or develops a health problem that substantially limits life expectancy or the ability or willingness to have curative lung surgery. Sources: (1) CDC. Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs - 2014 (www.cdc.gov/tobacco/stateandcommunity/best_practices/pdfs/2014/comprehensive.pdf) (2) The Guide to Community Preventive Services: Tobacco Use - 2010 (www.thecommunityguide.org/tobacco/index.html) (3) The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Lung Cancer Screening Recommendation Summary - 2013 (https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/UpdateSummaryFinal/lung-cancer-screening)

Healthy People Objective C-2:

Reduce the lung cancer death rate
U.S. Target: 45.5 deaths per 100,000 population

Note

Lung cancer mortality is defined as malignant neoplasm of bronchus and lung (ICD10: C34).  Data have been directly age-adjusted to the U.S. 2000 standard population. *This count or rate is statistically unstable (RSE >0.30), and may fluctuate widely across time periods due to random variation (chance). **This count or rate is extremely unstable (RSE >0.50). This value should not be used to infer population risk. You should combine years or otherwise increase your population size.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Cancer Deaths - Lung Cancer

Definition: Lung Cancer Deaths per 100,000 population in New Mexico
Numerator: Number of lung cancer deaths
Denominator: New Mexico population

Indicator Profile Report

Average Annual Lung Cancer Deaths per 100,000 Population (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/17/2017

Data Owner

Cancer Prevention and Control Section, Chronic Disease Prevention and Control Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health, Public Health Division, 5301 Central Ave. NE, Suite 800, Albuquerque, NM 87108, Telephone: (505) 841-5840. For data inquiries, contact the Cancer Section Epidemiologist, Libby Bruggeman, PhD, MA (email: Libby.Bruggeman@state.nm.us) or the Medical Officer/Epidemiologist, Susan Baum, MD, MPH (email: susan.baum@state.nm.us).




Lead Exposure - Children Under Age Three Years with Confirmed Elevated Blood Lead Levels: Percentage of Children, 2012

  • Dona Ana County
    0.25
    95% Confidence Interval (0 - 0.61)
    Statistical StabilityVery Unstable
    New Mexico
    0.28
    U.S.
    0.44
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Environmental lead is a common toxic metal, present in all areas of the United States. Lead exposure and lead poisoning are preventable. Lead exposure can adversely affect nearly every organ and system in the body, including the nervous, blood, hormonal, kidney, and reproductive systems. Children are more vulnerable to lead poisoning than adults. Children from all social and economic levels can be affected. The bodies of young children absorb lead more readily than adults. During the first three years of life, children's brains are growing the fastest, developing the critical connections in the nervous system that control thought, learning, hearing, movement, behavior, and emotions. The normal behaviors of children at this age, such as crawling, exploring, teething, and putting objects in their mouth, put them at an increased risk for lead exposure. Even blood lead levels lower than 5 micrograms per deciliter (ug/dL) may be associated with negative outcomes for children, such as cognitive impairment and learning disabilities, delayed development, changes in behavior, kidney problems and anemia. There is no known safe level of exposure to lead. The state requires all children enrolled in Medicaid be tested for lead exposure at ages 12 months and 24 months.

Note

Elevated blood lead levels are confirmed by either one elevated venous test result or two elevated capillary or unknown specimen test results less than 12 weeks apart. Childhood Blood Lead Surveillance data are not randomly sampled or representative of the population. Number and percent of children tested with confirmed elevated blood lead levels cannot be interpreted as prevalence or incidence for the population.  Approximately 5% of children were missing county of residence information; therefore some county-level percentages could change if unknown county data is identified. The US measure includes data from the 34 states reporting high quality data to the National Environmental Public Health Tracking Network, including Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming from 2007.

Data Sources

New Mexico Department of Health Blood Lead Database.  

Measure Description for Lead Exposure - Children Under Age Three Years with Confirmed Elevated Blood Lead Levels

Definition: The percentage of children born in the same year and tested before age three years with confirmed elevated blood lead levels (5 micrograms per deciliter - mcg/dL) is the number of children born in the same year and tested for lead exposure prior to the age of three years with confirmed elevated blood lead levels divided by the number of children born in the same year and tested for lead before age three years.
Numerator: Number of NM resident children born in the same year and tested for lead exposure prior to the age of three years with a blood lead level of 5 micrograms per deciliter (mcg/dL) or higher which was confirmed by a venous test or two capillary tests less than 12 weeks apart.
Denominator: Number of NM resident children born in the same year who were tested for lead exposure prior to the age of three years.

Indicator Profile Report

Children Born in the Same Year and Tested for Lead Before Age 3 With Confirmed Elevated Blood Lead Levels (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

04/13/2017

Data Owner

New Mexico Healthy Homes and Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, Environmental Health Epidemiology Bureau, Environmental Public Health Tracking Program, New Mexico Department Health, 1190 St. Francis Drive, Suite 1320, Santa Fe, NM 87505, Heidi Krapfl, Chief, (505)476-3577 heidi.krapfl@state.nm.us. Toll free: 1-888-878-8992




Influenza and Pneumonia Deaths: Deaths per 100,000 Population - Age Adjusted, 2012-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    13.4
    95% Confidence Interval (11.2 - 15.5)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    14.2
    U.S.
    15.2
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Influenza (flu) is a contagious respiratory illness caused by influenza viruses. Illness from influenza viruses can be severe and can lead to complications such as pneumonia and death. (1). Pneumonia is an infection of the lungs due to a variety of causes that can also be severe and lead to complications, including death. Some people, such as older people, young children, and people with certain health conditions, are at higher risk for serious complications and death from influenza and pneumonia. In 2012, Pneumonia and/or influenza were the 10th leading cause of death as underlying causes of death in New Mexico. Among the high risk populations they were the 6th and 8th leading causes for young children (1-4 years) and older adults (85+ years), respectively. (2)

Evidence-based Practices

Yearly influenza vaccination is a proven way to prevent many individuals from getting the flu and to decrease the severity and complications from flu. It is recommended that everyone 6 months and older receive the vaccine. (3) Certain vaccines help prevent some types of pneumonia. Good hygiene practices can also help prevent respiratory infections such as influenza and pneumonia. Good hygiene for prevention of respiratory infections includes washing your hands regularly, cleaning hard surfaces that are touched often (like doorknobs and countertops), and coughing or sneezing into a tissue or into your elbow or sleeve. You can also reduce your risk of getting pneumonia by staying healthy (preventing chronic illnesses such as diabetes and HIV/AIDS) and limiting exposure to cigarette smoke. (4)

Note

Deaths from influenza and pneumonia include all deaths with an underlying cause with ICD10 codes J09-J18. ICD10 codes are classifications of diseases and signs, symptoms, abnormal findings, complaints, social circumstances and external causes of injury or diseases. Underlying causes of death are diseases or injuries that initiated the chain of events leading directly to death, or the circumstances of the accident or violence which produced the fatal injury.  Death rates have been age-adjusted to the U.S. 2000 standard population.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.   U.S. Data: National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  

Measure Description for Influenza and Pneumonia Deaths

Definition: Deaths from influenza and pneumonia (underlying cause with ICD10: J09-J18) per 100,000 population, age-adjusted.
Numerator: Number of pneumonia and influenza deaths
Denominator: Number of persons in the population

Indicator Profile Report

Influenza and Pneumonia Deaths (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/15/2017

Data Owner

Influenza Surveillance Program, Infectious Disease Epidemiology Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Suite N-1350, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact: Katie Avery, nurse epidemiologist, phone 505-827-0083 or email: Catherine.Avery@state.nm.us




Invasive Pneumococcal Disease - Persons Aged 65 Years and Older: Cases per 100,000 Population, 2012-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    28.2
    95% Confidence Interval (19.8 - 36.6)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    33.2
    U.S.
    25
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

''Streptococcus pneumoniae'' (pneumococcus) remains a leading infectious cause of serious illness, including bacteremia, meningitis, and pneumonia, among older adults in the United States. Use of a 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) since 2000 and PCV13 since 2010 among children in the United States has reduced pneumococcal infections directly and indirectly among children, and indirectly among adults. By 2013, the incidence of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) caused by serotypes unique to PCV13 among adults aged 65 years and older had declined by approximately 50% compared with 2010, when PCV13 replaced PCV7 in the pediatric immunization schedule. However, in 2013 an estimated 13,500 cases of IPD occurred among adults aged 65 years and older. Approximately, 20% to 25% of IPD cases and 10% of community-acquired pneumonia cases in adults aged 65 years and older are caused by PCV13 serotypes and are potentially preventable with the use of PCV13 in this population. Additionally, New Mexico consistently has higher rates of IPD among adults aged 65 years and older when compared to national rates. The greatest burden of disease is seen in the American Indians/Alaska Natives (AIAN). The rate of disease among AIAN adults aged 65 years and older in 2013 was 137.6 per 100,000 compared to 34.1 per 100,000 among non- AIAN adults aged 65 years and older.

How Are We Doing?

Rates of IPD have decreased across all ages, including those adults aged 65 years and older, since the introduction of PCV7 in children in 2000 and PCV13 in 2010.

What Is Being Done?

On August 13, 2014, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended routine use of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13 [Prevnar 13, Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a subsidiary of Pfizer Inc.]) among adults aged 65 years and older. PCV13 should be administered in series with the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23 [Pneumovax23, Merck & Co., Inc.]), the vaccine currently recommended for adults aged 65 years and older. Additionally, New Mexico is one of ten national sites that participates in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Emerging Infectious Programs (EIP), Active Bacterial Core Surveillance (ABCs) which includes conducting active population-based surveillance for invasive ''Streptococcus pneumoniae''. Also, as a part of the CDC EIP ABCs network, New Mexico is participating in a study evaluating the effectiveness of PCV13 in adults aged 65 years and older.

Healthy People Objective IID-4.2:

New invasive pneumococcal infections among adults aged 65 years and older
U.S. Target: 31 new cases per 100,000 adults aged 65 years and older

Data Sources

New Mexico Data Source, 2006 and later: New Mexico Electronic Disease Surveillance System (NM-EDSS), Infectious Disease Epidemiology Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Invasive Pneumococcal Disease - Persons Aged 65 Years and Older

Definition: Rate per 100,000 of invasive pneumococcal disease in adults aged 65 years and older in New Mexico. Number of ''Streptococcus pneumoniae'' in New Mexico adults aged 65 years and older divided by the population of New Mexico residents adults aged 65 years and older x 100,000.
Numerator: The number of invasive, culture-confirmed cases of ''Streptococcus pneumoniae'' in adults aged 65 years and older in New Mexico in one calendar year time.
Denominator: Population of New Mexico resident adults aged 65 years and older in one calendar year time period.

Indicator Profile Report

Invasive Pneumococcal Disease - Persons Aged 65 Years and Older (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/25/2017

Data Owner

Active Bacterial Core (ABCs) Surveillance Program, Infectious Disease Epidemiology Bureau, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health. Phone: (505) 476-3654 Fax: (505) 827-0013, Email: Brooke.Doman@state.nm.us




Chlamydia Rates: Cases per 100,000 Population, 2016

  • Dona Ana County
    700.0
    95% Confidence Interval (664.9 - 735.0)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    623.3
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Chlamydia is the most common bacterial sexually transmitted disease. Even though symptoms of chlamydia are usually mild or absent, serious complications that cause irreversible damage, including infertility, can occur "silently" before a woman ever recognizes a problem(1). It is the leading preventable cause of infertility, and screening and treatment are the best means of preventing it.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

Chlamydia can be transmitted during vaginal, anal, or oral sex. Chlamydia can also be passed from an infected mother to her baby during vaginal childbirth. Any sexually active person can be infected with chlamydia. The greater the number of sex partners, the greater the risk of infection.

How Are We Doing?

Overall, chlamydia rates have been increasing from 2011 (547.0 per 100,000 population) to 2016 (623.0 per 100,000 population). In 2016, chlamydia rates were highest in the Black/African American race/ethnicity category (892.8 per 100,000), second highest in the American Indian/Alaska Native population, (836.4 per 100,000 population), and third highest in the Hispanic category (511.1 per 100,000). The lowest rates were found in the White category (275.6 per 100,000 population) and Asian/Pacific Islander category (197.2 per 100,000) respectively. By county, the highest Chlamydia rate for 2016 was found in McKinley county (1031.6 per 100,000), followed by San Juan County (798.4 per 100,000) and Roosevelt County (745.9 per 100,000). It is unknown whether this is an actual increase in rates or due to better testing and detection activities.

What Is Being Done?

Chlamydia testing is performed on females under age 26 at approximately 200 test sites including 54 public health offices and family planning and other provider agreement sites, in addition to routine treatment and surveillance activities.

Evidence-based Practices

Despite an a recommendation from the U.S Preventive Services Task Force to annually screen all sexually active females under age 25, data from health plans shows that fewer than 50% of that group actually gets screened each year. Chlamydia is the leading preventable cause of infertility, and screening and treatment are the best means of preventing it.

Related Indicators

Health Status Outcomes:


Data Sources

Patient Reporting Investigating Surveillance Manager, Infectious Disease Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Chlamydia Rates

Definition: Chlamydia cases reported in the state of New Mexico per 100,000 population.
Numerator: Number of cases of chlamydia reported to the state of New Mexico (and Centers for Disease Control) in New Mexico residents from all health care providers.
Denominator: Total Population

Indicator Profile Report

Chlamydia Cases per 100,000 Population (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/12/2017

Data Owner

Sexually-Transmitted Diseases Program, Infectious Disease Bureau, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive Santa Fe, NM 87508-6100, contact Dan Burke, Program Manager, (505) 476-1778, Daniel.Burke@state.nm.us; or for data inquiries contact Angie Bartok, Epidemiologist, (505) 827-2422, Agnes.Bartok@state.nm.us




Pertussis: Cases per 100,000, 2012-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    3.3
    95% Confidence Interval (2.2 - 4.4)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    21.8
    U.S.
    6.5
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Pertussis or "whooping cough" is a highly contagious respiratory tract infection caused by the Bordetella pertussis bacteria. Since vaccine-induced immunity to Bordetella pertussis is of limited duration, many adolescents and most adults have little or no residual immunity. Most reported pertussis cases among adolescents and adults are thought to occur because of this decline in protective immunity. Infants who are too young to have been fully vaccinated are at high risk of severe and potentially life-threatening illness from exposure to persons with active disease. Pertussis vaccine led to a dramatic decrease in the incidence of the disease, from approximately 150 cases per 100,000 population pre-vaccine in the 1940s to about 1 case per 100,000 by 1980; however, pertussis disease rates have increased since 1980.

How Are We Doing?

New Mexico has experienced pertussis rates of epidemic proportions since 2011. In 2012, New Mexico experience a three-fold increase in cases compared to 2011 and the U.S. experienced incidence not seen since 1959.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Department of Health provides quality improvement visits to Vaccines for Children providers to promote best practices for immunizations. Measuring and tracking coverage rates helps providers diagnose missed opportunities for immunizations. NMSIIS, the state on-line immunization registry, tracks immunizations received so that children can be recalled to be brought up-to-date for any needed shots. Learn more about evidence-based practices for childhood immunizations from the CDC Community Guide at http://www.thecommunityguide.org/vaccines/universally/index.html.

Evidence-based Practices

The best way to prevent pertussis is to get vaccinated. In the US, the recommended pertussis vaccine for children is called DTaP. This is a safe and effective combination vaccine that protects children against three diseases: diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis. For maximum protection against pertussis, children need five DTaP shots. The first three shots are given at 2, 4, and 6 months of age. The fourth shot is given between 15 and 18 months of age, and a fifth shot is given when a child enters school, at 4-6 years of age. Parents can also help protect infants by keeping them away as much as possible from anyone who has cold symptoms or is coughing. Vaccine protection for pertussis, tetanus, and diphtheria can fade with time. There are boosters for adolescents and adults that contain tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis (called Tdap). Pre-teens going to the doctor for their regular check-up at age 11 or 12 years should get a dose of Tdap. Adults who didn't get Tdap as a pre-teen or teen should get one dose of Tdap. In order to protect the newborn, pregnant women should get a Tdap during each pregnancy, ideally between 27 and 36 weeks of gestation. Infants younger than 1 year age who are too young to have been fully vaccinated have the highest rates of pertussis and are also at highest risk of severe illness. It is especially important that older children, adolescents, and adults in contact with these infants be vaccinated against pertussis.

Note

Includes confirmed and probable cases. 

Data Sources

New Mexico Data Source, 2006 and later: New Mexico Electronic Disease Surveillance System (NM-EDSS), Infectious Disease Epidemiology Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health.   New Mexico Data Source, 2005 and earlier: National Electronic Telecommunications System for Surveillance (NETSS), Infectious Disease Epidemiology Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Pertussis

Definition: The number of probable and confirmed cases of Pertussis per 100,000 population (person-years at risk).
Numerator: Number of confirmed and probable pertussis cases that occurred during the measurement (time) period.
Denominator: Estimated total population at risk during the measurement (time) period.

Indicator Profile Report

Pertussis Cases per 100,000 Population (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/30/2017

Data Owner

Infectious Disease Epidemiology Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Telephone: (505) 827-0081, Toll-Free Reporting Number: 1-800-432-4404




Injury - Unintentional Injury Deaths: Deaths per 100,000 Population, 2012-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    49
    95% Confidence Interval (44.7 - 53.3)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    65.3
    U.S.
    43.2
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

From 1999 through 2015, unintentional injury was consistently the leading cause of death among people 1 to 44 years of age in New Mexico and the 3rd leading cause of death for all ages. Poisoning was the leading cause of unintentional injury death from 2007 through 2015, followed by motor vehicle traffic-related injury and fall-related injury. About 90% of unintentional poisoning deaths in NM are due to drug overdose.

How Are We Doing?

The unintentional injury death rate in NM has fluctuated from 2003 through 2015 with age-adjusted deaths rates of 70.2/100,000 in 2014 and 66.4/100,000 in 2015. American Indians have the highest unintentional injury death rate.

What Is Being Done?

The poisoning, motor vehicle traffic and falls indicator reports contain information on what New Mexico is doing to prevent the three leading causes of unintentional injury death.

Healthy People Objective IVP-11:

Reduce unintentional injury deaths
U.S. Target: 36.0 deaths per 100,000 population

Note

Rates have been age-adjusted to the 2000 U.S. standard population.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Injury - Unintentional Injury Deaths

Definition: Deaths due to all causes of unintentional injury
Numerator: Number of unintentional injury deaths. (ICD-10 codes V01-X59, Y85-Y86)
Denominator: The mid-year estimated population of New Mexico

Indicator Profile Report

Unintentional Injury Death Rates (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/27/2016

Data Owner

Injury Epidemiology Unit, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N1105, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Glenda Hubbard, Epidemiologist, by telephone at (505) 476-3607 or email to Glenda.Hubbard@state.nm.us.




Injury - Unintentional Injury Hospitalization: Hospital Discharges per 10,000 Children Age 0-4, 2009-2013

  • Dona Ana County
    4
    95% Confidence Interval (2.6 - 5.4)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    12.5
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Between 1999 and 2010, unintentional injuries were consistently the leading cause of death among people 1 to 44 years of age in New Mexico. The number of unintentional injury hospitalizations among all ages ranged from 4,650 in 1999 to 7,448 in 2006. Even more people visit the emergency department and physician offices or clinics for unintentional injuries each year.

Healthy People Objective IVP-12:

Reduce nonfatal unintentional injuries
U.S. Target: 8,297.4 injuries per 100,000 population

Data Sources

Hospital Inpatient Discharge Data, New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Data Source: Geospatial and Population Studies Program, University of New Mexico. http://bber.unm.edu/bber_research_demPop.html.  

Measure Description for Injury - Unintentional Injury Hospitalization

Definition: Inpatient hospital stays due to all causes of unintentional injury
Numerator: Number of unintentional injury hospital discharges. (ICD-9 codes E800-E869, E880-E929)
Denominator: The mid-year estimated population of New Mexico

Indicator Profile Report

Unintentional Injury Hospital Discharges (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

03/06/2015

Data Owner

Injury Epidemiology Unit, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N1105, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Glenda Hubbard, Epidemiologist, by telephone at (505) 476-3607 or email to Glenda.Hubbard@state.nm.us.




Injury - Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Deaths: Deaths per 100,000 Population, 2012-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    11.3
    95% Confidence Interval (9.2 - 13.3)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    16.6
    U.S.
    10.88
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Motor vehicle traffic-related injuries are the leading cause of injury death for people 1 to 24 years of age in New Mexico. Youth and young adults ages 15 to 24 years and American Indians have the highest motor vehicle traffic-related death rate. Distracted driving, speeding, fatigue and drunk driving are the leading causes of motor vehicle traffic-related injuries. Alcohol is involved in one-third of fatal motor vehicle crashes in NM.

How Are We Doing?

From 1999 through 2006, the motor vehicle traffic-related death rate in New Mexico remained relatively stable. The motor vehilcle traffic-related death rate decreased 40% from 2006 (22.7/100,00) through 2011 (13.7/100,000) and then increased in 2014 to a rate of 17.5/100,000 population. The increase in the rate from 2011 through 2014 was statistically significant.

What Is Being Done?

During the last decade the Office of Injury Prevention has supported efforts to pass laws on the use of child safety seats and booster seats in motor vehicles. The NM Safety Belt Use Act of 2001 requires each occupant of a motor vehicle to have a safety belt properly fastened about his/her body while the vehicle is in motion. The New Mexico Child Restraint Act that was passed in 2005 requires children under the age of one to be in a rear-facing child safety seat and children under 5 and children under 40 pounds to be placed in a child safety seat or booster seat. The law also has motor vehicle restraint requirements for 5 to 12 year olds. The Legislature passed, and the Governor signed a bill into law in 2015, prohibiting texting while driving, and providing penalties for violations. A bill was introduced in the Legislature (but did not pass) in 2015, that would have required the use of a motorcycle safety helmet, while another was introduced that would have required the use of a safety helmet or payment of increased fees to permit motorcycle operators or passengers to refrain from wearing a safety helmet.

Evidence-based Practices

"Use of child safety seats and safety belts and deterrence of alcohol-impaired driving are among the most important preventive measures to reduce motor vehicle-related injuries and deaths."(1) Recommended interventions for child safety seats include laws mandating their use, distribution of safety seats, community-wide education, enhanced enforcement, and incentive programs. Recommended interventions for seat belt use primary (versus secondary) laws mandating their use and enhanced enforcement programs. Recommended interventions for alcohol-impaired driving include 0.08% alcohol concentration laws, lower blood-alcohol content laws for young or inexperienced drivers, minimum legal drinking age laws, publicized sobriety checkpoint programs, mass media campaigns, ignition interlocks, and school-based instructional programs. For more information on the above interventions, please visit, "http://www.thecommunityguide.org." (1) Motor Vehicle-Related Injury Prevention, downloaded from The Community Guide website, http://www.thecommunityguide.org/mvoi/index.html, on 10/8/2013.

Healthy People Objective IVP-13.1:

Reduce motor vehicle crash-related deaths: Deaths per 100,000 population
U.S. Target: 12.4 deaths per 100,000 population

Note

Motor vehicle traffic crash deaths are unintentional deaths from motor vehicle crashes that occurred on a public roadway.  Rates have been age-adjusted to the U.S. 2000 standard population.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.   National data downloaded from the Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS).  

Measure Description for Injury - Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Deaths

Definition: The number of unintentional injury deaths due to motor vehicle traffic crashes per 100,000 population.
Numerator: The number of motor vehicle traffic crash-related unintentional injury deaths per year
Denominator: The mid-year estimated population.

Indicator Profile Report

Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Death Rates (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/27/2016

Data Owner

Injury Epidemiology Unit, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N1105, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Glenda Hubbard, Epidemiologist, by telephone at (505) 476-3607 or email to Glenda.Hubbard@state.nm.us.




Injury - Older Adult Falls Deaths: Deaths per 100,000 Population Age 65+, 2012-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    94.4
    95% Confidence Interval (79.0 - 109.8)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    90.0
    U.S.
    59.6
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Falls are the leading cause of unintentional (accidental) injury death among adults 65 years of age and older in the United States and in New Mexico. The majority of injuries from falls that lead to death were hip fracture and traumatic brain injury. A serious injury from a fall can limit mobility and independent living. Falls also can increase the risk of early death. Many people who fall develop a fear of falling, and may become more sedentary. Yet, most falls are preventable and not a normal part of aging.

How Are We Doing?

The fall-related death rate among adults 65 years of age and older in New Mexico increased 114% between 1999 and 2007. The fall-related death rate decreased 20% during 2007-2016 and increased 21% from year 2013 to 2016.

What Is Being Done?

NMDOH established an Older Adult Falls Task Force in 2013 as a result of House Joint Memorial 32, to evaluate NM's current approach to community-based fall prevention and to develop strategies for effective change. The Office of Injury Prevention coordinates the statewide NM Adult Falls Prevention Coalition, http://nmstopfalls.org. The coalition has prioritized the following prevention strategies: home safety modifications, physical activity that improves strength and balance, annual medication review for safety, and environmental safety in the community. NMDOH also recommends annual vision checks and proper Vitamin D intake. PHYSICAL ACTIVITY: NMDOH has sponsored instructor training on the Tai Ji Quan: Moving for Better Balance evidence-based physical activity program to reduce the risk of falling among older adults. Tai Ji Quan: Moving for Better Balance is often taught in Senior Centers and Senior Living Communities, and is based on clear evidence of effectiveness in reducing the frequency of adult falls. Additionally, NMDOH is working to expand the adoption of other evidence-based physical activity programs, such as A Matter of Balance and Steady As You Go, that have shown to reduce the risk for falls among older adults. ANNUAL MEDICATION & VISION CHECKS AND VITAMIN D INTAKE: NMDOH has also sponsored peer-to-peer training for health care providers on clinical implementation of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) fall prevention toolkit, Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths and Injuries (STEADI), which addresses multiple health risk factors for falls. HOME SAFETY MODIFICATION: The NMDOH encourages municipal services such as Fire Departments, Paramedicine units, and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) to do community outreach and home visits to community members at risk for falls, and to provide education about how to make the home safer and prevent falls and injuries. For further information about current fall prevention initiatives throughout New Mexico, please contact Karen Dugas, MPH, the NMDOH Falls Prevention Coordinator, at (505) 827-5146, karen.dugas@state.nm.us.

Evidence-based Practices

How can older adults prevent falls?(1) -Exercise regularly. It is important that the exercises focus on increasing leg strength and improving balance, and that they get more challenging over time. Tai Chi programs are especially good. -Ask their doctor or pharmacist to review their medicines - both prescription and over-the counter - to identify medicines that may cause side effects or interactions such as dizziness or drowsiness. -Have their eyes checked by an eye doctor at least once a year and update their eyeglasses to maximize their vision. Consider getting a pair with single vision distance lenses for some activities such as walking outside. -Make their homes safer by reducing tripping hazards, adding grab bars inside and outside the tub or shower and next to the toilet, adding railings on both sides of stairways, and improving the lighting in their homes. (1) Important Facts about Falls: What You Can Do To Prevent Falls, downloaded from http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Falls/adultfalls.html on November 23, 2015.

Healthy People Objective IVP-23.2:

Prevent an increase in the rate of fall-related deaths: Adults aged 65 years and older
U.S. Target: 47.0 deaths per 100,000 population

Related Indicators

Relevant Population Characteristics:

Risk Factors:


Note

Rates are age-specific death rates for ICD-9 Codes: E880-E886, E888 (1990-1998) and ICD-10 codes ICD-10 Codes: W00-W19 (1999 forward). 

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.   Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, CDC WONDER Online Database (http://wonder.cdc.gov).  

Measure Description for Injury - Older Adult Falls Deaths

Definition: Fall-related death rate is the number of unintentional injury deaths due to falls in persons age 65 years or older, per 100,000 population age 65 years or older.
Numerator: The number of unintentional injury deaths due to falls in persons age 65 years or older.
Denominator: The mid-year estimated population.

Indicator Profile Report

Fall-related Unintentional Injury Death Among Adults 65+ Years of Age (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/27/2017

Data Owner

Injury Epidemiology Unit, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N1105, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Glenda Hubbard, Epidemiologist, by telephone at (505) 476-3607 or email to Glenda.Hubbard@state.nm.us.




Mental Health - Adult Suicide Attempts: Percentage Who Attempted Suicide, 2011

  • Dona Ana County
    0.0%
    95% Confidence Interval (0.0% - 0.3%)
    Statistical StabilityVery Unstable
    New Mexico
    0.7%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Suicide rates in NM have been at least twice the national rate since at least 1995. Due to the disproportionate rate of suicide occurring in New Mexico for decades and the rising rate of suicide nationwide, understanding the prevalence of risk factors for suicide and the disparities in the New Mexico population is critical for prevention planning. Prior suicide attempts have been shown to be the strongest risk factor for suicide, and more than half of suicide attempts occur within one year of the onset of suicide ideation. Based on this knowledge of suicidal behavior, the World Health Organization and the United States Office of the Surgeon General have recommended routine surveillance for suicidal behavior such as attempts and ideation. In doing so, suicide prevention plans can be targeted specifically at communities with high risk and evaluated more thoroughly.

How Are We Doing?

In 2011, 0.7% of NM adults reported that they had attempted suicide in the past 12 months.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Department of Health collects, analyzes, and disseminates suicide death data in order to identify populations with disproportionately high rates of suicide. These data can be used in conjunction with community partners to develop and implement prevention and intervention efforts to reduce suicide deaths. The NMDOH Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics collects information on all NM deaths and produces annual suicide statistics. The NM Violent Death Reporting System was implemented in 2005 to add to the understanding of how and why violent deaths occur. This active surveillance system collects comprehensive information about all violent deaths, including suicide, by linking data from death certificates, medical examiner records, and law enforcement reports into one complete record. In addition, the NM Child Fatality Review Program Suicide Panel completes an in-depth case review of suicides among children through age 17 years and makes recommendations about how to prevent future deaths.

Evidence-based Practices

For reviews of evidence-based practices, please see: *US Preventive Services Task Force: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/ *Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Community Guide: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html *Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/Index.aspx

Healthy People Objective MHMD-1:

Reduce the suicide rate
U.S. Target: 10.2 suicides per 100,000

Note

(**) Values suppressed due to small numbers. The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Mental Health - Adult Suicide Attempts

Definition: Percentage of NM residents 18 years or older who attempted suicide, defined as answering "Yes" to the question, "In the past year, have you attempted suicide?"
Numerator: The number of survey respondents who reported attempting suicide in the past year.
Denominator: Total number of survey respondents except those with missing, "Don"t Know/Not sure," and "Refused" responses.

Indicator Profile Report

Adult Suicide Attempts (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

11/23/2015

Data Owner

Mental Health Epidemiology, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N1320, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Carol Moss, by telephone at (505) 476-1440 or email to Carol.Moss@state.nm.us.




Mental Health - Youth Attempted Suicide: Percentage Attempted Suicide, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    10.2
    95% Confidence Interval (8.2 - 12.6)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    9.4
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

In NM in 2015, suicide was the leading cause of death, tied with unintentional injuries, for youth between the ages of 15 and 19. In the U.S. in 2015, according to the CDC, suicide was the second leading cause of death for this same age group. While girls are more likely than boys to attempt suicide, boys are more likely to die of suicide. A previous suicide attempt is among the strongest risk factors for completed suicide.

How Are We Doing?

The percentage of NM high school students who attempted suicide has decreased from 12.9% in 2001 to 9.4% in 2015.

What Is Being Done?

The NM Department of Health continues to analyze and share data, reports and presentations with each year of completed YRRS surveys. School administrators and youth health advocates utilize this information to guide health promotion and treatment programs for youth in NM. Youth suicide prevention and intervention activities were initially funded by the NM Legislature in June 2005. Implementation of suicide prevention strategies statewide is a significant focus of the NM Department of Health's Office of School and Adolescent Health (OSAH). Suicide prevention activities include: 1) Providing funding for statewide crisis line response to people at risk for suicide. 2) Identifying and developing relationships with existing crisis line operators statewide to enhance statewide suicide crisis response capacity. 3) Raising awareness that suicide is a public health problem and supporting initiatives to decrease stigma surrounding mental health issues. 4) Ensuring screening, early identification, referral and follow-up for suicide risk through Student Health Questionnaires for each student who accesses school-based health centers (SBHC). 5) Offering intensive training and technical assistance for all school-based health centers surrounding identification of signs of suicide, suicide prevention and crisis response planning. 6) Gatekeeper training for educators, Medical and Behavioral Health providers, community members and youth; Natural Helper Programs; implementation and support for Gay-Straight Alliances; intensive training for school nurses; and psychiatric consultation for school counselors and school-based health center providers. 7) Providing School Health Updates, Head to Toe Conference and other regional trainings to increase awareness and knowledge of the risk factors and warning signs of suicide among school counselors, school health personnel, and behavioral health providers on suicide, crisis response and grief and trauma support in the school setting.

Evidence-based Practices

For reviews of evidence-based practices, please see: -US Preventive Services Task Force: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/ -Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?s Community Guide: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html -Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration?s National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: http://www.samhsa.gov/nrepp

Healthy People Objective MHMD-2:

Reduce suicide attempts by adolescents
U.S. Target: 1.7 suicide attempts per 100

Note

The NM Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey (YRRS) is administered in odd years and is part of the national Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS), which is coordinated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Each state, territorial, tribal, and large urban school district participating in YRBS employs a two-stage, cluster sample design to produce a representative sample of students in grades 9-12 in its jurisdiction. In the first sampling stage, in all except a few sites, schools are selected with probability proportional to school enrollment size. In the second sampling stage, intact classes of a required subject or intact classes during a required period (e.g., second period) are selected randomly. All students in sampled classes are eligible to participate. A weight is applied to each student record to adjust for student nonresponse and the distribution of students by grade, sex, and race/ethnicity in each jurisdiction.  (**) Data suppressed due to small numbers. (#) Values are unstable.

Data Sources

New Mexico Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, New Mexico Department of Health and Public Education Department.  

Measure Description for Mental Health - Youth Attempted Suicide

Definition: Percentage of students grades 9-12 in a NM public school who reported attempting suicide at least one time, in the past 12 months.
Numerator: Number of students who answered, "1 time", "2 or 3 times", "4 or 5 times", or "6 or more times", to the question, "During the past 12 months, how many times did you actually attempt suicide?"
Denominator: Total number of respondents who answered the question, "During the past 12 months, how many times did you actually attempt suicide?"

Indicator Profile Report

Youth Who Attempted Suicide in the Past Year, Grades 9 - 12 (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/19/2017

Data Owner

Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, Survey Section, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health and Coordinated School Health & Wellness Bureau, NM Public Education Department. Contact NMDOH, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Telephone: (505) 476-1779.




Mental Health - Youth Injured in a Suicide Attempt: Percentage Injured in Suicide Attempt, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    3.6%
    95% Confidence Interval (2.6% - 4.9%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    3.2%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

In 2014, according to the CDC, suicide was the second leading cause of death in NM and in the US for youth between the ages of 15 and 24. While girls are more likely than boys to attempt suicide, boys are more likely to die of suicide. A previous suicide attempt is among the strongest risk factors for completed suicide.

How Are We Doing?

In 2015, 3.2% of NM high school students reported being injured in a suicide attempt.

What Is Being Done?

The NM Department of Health continues to analyze and share data, reports and presentations with each year of completed YRRS surveys. School administrators and youth health advocates utilize this information to guide health promotion and treatment programs for youth in NM. Youth suicide prevention and intervention activities were initially funded by the NM Legislature in June 2005. Implementation of suicide prevention strategies statewide is a significant focus of the NM Department of Health's Office of School and Adolescent Health (OSAH). Suicide prevention activities include: 1) Providing funding for statewide crisis line response to people at risk for suicide. 2) Identifying and developing relationships with existing crisis line operators statewide to enhance statewide suicide crisis response capacity. 3) Raising awareness that suicide is a public health problem and supporting initiatives to decrease stigma surrounding mental health issues. 4) Ensuring screening, early identification, referral and follow-up for suicide risk through Student Health Questionnaires for each student who accesses school-based health centers (SBHC). 5) Offering intensive training and technical assistance for all school-based health centers surrounding identification of signs of suicide, suicide prevention and crisis response planning. 6) Gatekeeper training for educators, Medical and Behavioral Health providers, community members and youth; Natural Helper Programs; implementation and support for Gay-Straight Alliances; intensive training for school nurses; and psychiatric consultation for school counselors and school-based health center providers. 7) Providing School Health Updates, Head to Toe Conference and other regional trainings to increase awareness and knowledge of the risk factors and warning signs of suicide among school counselors, school health personnel, and behavioral health providers on suicide, crisis response and grief and trauma support in the school setting.

Evidence-based Practices

For reviews of evidence-based practices, please see: -US Preventive Services Task Force: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/ -Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?s Community Guide: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html -Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration?s National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: http://www.samhsa.gov/nrepp

Healthy People Objective MHMD-2:

Reduce suicide attempts by adolescents
U.S. Target: 1.7 suicide attempts per 100

Note

The NM Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey (YRRS) is administered in odd years and is part of the national Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS), which is coordinated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Each state, territorial, tribal, and large urban school district participating in YRBS employs a two-stage, cluster sample design to produce a representative sample of students in grades 9-12 in its jurisdiction. In the first sampling stage, in all except a few sites, schools are selected with probability proportional to school enrollment size. In the second sampling stage, intact classes of a required subject or intact classes during a required period (e.g., second period) are selected randomly. All students in sampled classes are eligible to participate. A weight is applied to each student record to adjust for student nonresponse and the distribution of students by grade, sex, and race/ethnicity in each jurisdiction.  (**) Values suppressed due to small numbers. (#) Values are unstable. (##) Values are very unstable.

Data Sources

New Mexico Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, New Mexico Department of Health and Public Education Department.  

Measure Description for Mental Health - Youth Injured in a Suicide Attempt

Definition: Percentage of students grades 9-12 in a NM public school who reported being injured in a suicide attempt in the past 12 months.
Numerator: Number of students who answered "Yes" to the question, "If you attempted suicide during the past 12 months, did any attempt result in an injury, poisoning, or overdose that had to be treated by a doctor or nurse"?
Denominator: Total number of respondents who answered the question, "If you attempted suicide during the past 12 months, did any attempt result in an injury, poisoning, or overdose that had to be treated by a doctor or nurse"?

Indicator Profile Report

Youth Injured in a Suicide Attempt in the Past Year, Grades 9 - 12 (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/19/2017

Data Owner

Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, Survey Section, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health and Coordinated School Health & Wellness Bureau, NM Public Education Department. Contact NMDOH, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Telephone: (505) 476-1779.




Mental Health - Emergency Department Admissions for Self Injury: ED Encounters per 100,000 Population, 2010-2014

  • Dona Ana County
    152.0
    95% Confidence Interval (144.3 - 159.7)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    163.2
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

In New Mexico, suicidal behaviors are a serious public health problem and a major cause of morbidity and mortality. In 2014, suicide was the eighth leading cause of all death in New Mexico, and the second leading cause of death among youth and adults 15-44 years (NCHS). From 2010 to 2014, suicide accounted for an average of 12,712 Years of Potential Life Lost (YPLL) per year in NM among those under 65 years of age. NM ranks fifth of 51 for suicide deaths, and has ranked among the top 10 since 1997.

How Are We Doing?

The age-adjusted rate of suicide attempts resulting in emergency room visits has remained relatively stable from 2010 to 2014. From 2010 to 2013, there were 163 visits to the emergency room following self injury for every 100,000 New Mexico residents.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Department of Health collects, analyzes, and disseminates suicide death data in order to identify populations with disproportionately high rates of suicide. These data can be used in conjunction with community partners to develop and implement prevention and intervention efforts to reduce suicide deaths. The NMDOH Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics collects information on all NM deaths and produces annual suicide statistics. The NM Violent Death Reporting System was implemented in 2005 to add to the understanding of how and why violent deaths occur. This active surveillance system collects comprehensive information about all violent deaths, including suicide, by linking data from death certificates, medical examiner records, and law enforcement reports into one complete record. In addition, the NM Child Fatality Review Program Suicide Panel completes an in-depth case review of suicides among children through age 17 years and makes recommendations about how to prevent future deaths.

Evidence-based Practices

For reviews of evidence-based practices, please see: -Healthy People Objective: US Preventive Services Task Force: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/ -Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Community Guide: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html -Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/Index.aspx

Healthy People Objective MHMD-2:

Reduce suicide attempts by adolescents
U.S. Target: 1.7 suicide attempts per 100

Note

The ED dataset is derived from data provided by individual non-federal EDs in NM. Data are available for 2010 through 2014. Only NM residents are included in this report. The denominator is the NM population estimate generated by the University of New Mexico GPS Program.  All rates are per 100,000, age-adjusted to the 2000 U.S. standard population.

Data Sources

Emergency Department Dataset, New Mexico Department of Health.  

Measure Description for Mental Health - Emergency Department Admissions for Self Injury

Definition: Emergency department (ED) visits for intentional self injury include primary diagnoses of ICD-9 codes E950-E959.
Numerator: The total number of visits by New Mexico residents to EDs for intentional self injury.
Denominator: The estimated mid-year population.

Indicator Profile Report

Emergency Department Admissions for Self Injury (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

02/02/2017

Data Owner

Mental Health Epidemiology, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N1320, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Carol Moss, by telephone at (505) 476-1440 or email to Carol.Moss@state.nm.us.




Suicide Death: Age-Adjusted Deaths per 100,000 Population, 2011-2015

  • Dona Ana County
    16.7
    95% Confidence Interval (14.2 - 19.3)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    21.2
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

In NM, suicidal behaviors are a serious public health problem and a major cause of morbidity and mortality. In 2015, suicide was the eighth leading cause of death in New Mexico and the second leading cause of death by age group for persons 10-49 years of age. From 2011 to 2015, suicide accounted for an average of 13,101 Years of Potential Life Lost (YPLL) per year in NM, fourth after unintentional injury, cancer, and heart disease deaths. The YPLL is a measure of premature mortality in a population that describes the impact of injury-related deaths on a society compared to other causes of death. Over the last 20 years, suicide death rates in New Mexico have been at least 50% higher than national rates. Suicide deaths have been increasing in both New Mexico and the United States. Mental disorders, particularly clinical depression, increase the risk for both attempted suicide and suicide. Other risk factors associated with suicide include a family history of suicide, a family history of child maltreatment, previous suicide attempt(s), a history of alcohol and substance abuse, feelings of hopelessness, isolation, barriers to mental health treatment, loss (of relationships, social connections, work, finances), physical illness and easy access to lethal methods, such as firearms.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

Mental and substance use disorders, especially alcohol use disorders, are associated with suicide. Approximately 23% of suicide deaths are directly attributable to alcohol consumption.

How Are We Doing?

The suicide rate in NM has consistently been at least 50% higher than the U.S. rate. Suicide rates in NM and the U.S. have increased over the period 2000-2015. In 2014, the age-adjusted suicide rate in NM was 62% higher than the U.S. age-adjusted rate. In 2015, New Mexico's suicide rate was the highest it has been in two decades.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Department of Health collects, analyzes, and disseminates suicide death data in order to identify populations with disproportionately high rates of suicide. These data can be used in conjunction with community partners to develop and implement prevention and intervention efforts to reduce suicide deaths. The NMDOH Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics collects information on all NM deaths and produces annual suicide statistics. The NM Violent Death Reporting System was implemented in 2005 to add to the understanding of how and why violent deaths occur. This active surveillance system collects comprehensive information about all violent deaths, including suicide, by linking data from death certificates, medical examiner records, and law enforcement reports into one complete record. In addition, the NM Child Fatality Review Program Suicide Panel completes an in-depth case review of suicides among children through age 17 years and makes recommendations about how to prevent future deaths.

Evidence-based Practices

For reviews of evidence-based practices, please see: -US Preventive Services Task Force: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/ -Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Community Guide: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html -Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: http://www.samhsa.gov/nrepp

Healthy People Objective MHMD-1:

Reduce the suicide rate
U.S. Target: 10.2 suicides per 100,000

Note

Suicide deaths for 1995-1998 were defined by underlying cause of death based on International Classification of Diseases, version 9 (ICD-9) codes; and suicide deaths for 1999 and later were defined by underlying cause of death based on International Classification of Diseases, version 10 (ICD-10) codes.  All rates are per 100,000, age-adjusted to the 2000 U.S. standard population. (#) Values are unstable. (##) Values are very unstable.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   New Mexico Population Estimates: Geospatial and Population Studies Program, University of New Mexico. http://bber.unm.edu/bber_research_demPop.html.  

Measure Description for Suicide Death

Definition: The suicide death rate is defined as the number of deaths attributed to suicide per 100,000 population.
Numerator: The total number of suicide deaths per year.
Denominator: The estimated mid-year population.

Indicator Profile Report

Suicide Deaths (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

11/29/2016

Data Owner

Injury Epidemiology, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N1100, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Tierney Murphy, by telephone at (505) 827-6816 or email to Tierney.Murphy@state.nm.us.




Suicide Death - Youth, 10-24 Years: Deaths per 100,000 Population, New Mexico, 2009-2013, and U.S., 2013

  • Dona Ana County
    8.9
    95% Confidence Interval (5.2 - 12.5)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    14.9
    U.S.
    8.1
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Adolescent suicide is a public health problem of considerable magnitude in New Mexico. In 2013, suicide was the second leading cause of death in youth 10-24 years of age, with 62 deaths reported that year. From 1999 to 2013, suicide death rates in this age group have remained relatively stable, with NM's rate being about twice the national rate. In 2013, NM high school students reported higher rates of attempted suicide and attempted suicide resulting in an injury compared to U.S rates, although not significantly higher. Mental disorders increase the risk for both attempted and completed suicide. Other risk factors for completed suicide among youth include substance abuse, a family history of suicidal behavior, parental psychiatric disorders, stressful life events, and access to firearms.

How Are We Doing?

The youth suicide rate in NM has consistently been at least 1.5 times the U.S. rate from 1999 to 2013. Over this time period, the youth suicide rate in NM has remained stable while the U.S. rate has increased slightly. In 2013, the youth suicide rate in NM (14.2 per 100,000) was 75.3% higher than the U.S. rate (8.1 per 100,000).

What Is Being Done?

Youth suicide prevention and intervention activities were initially funded by the NM Legislature in June 2005. Implementation of suicide prevention strategies statewide is a significant focus of the New Mexico Department of Health Office of School and Adolescent Health (OSAH). Suicide prevention activities include: 1) Providing funding for statewide crisis line response to people at risk for suicide. 2) Identifying and developing relationships with existing crisis line operators statewide to enhance statewide suicide crisis response capacity. 3) Raising awareness that suicide is a public health problem and supporting initiatives to decrease stigma surrounding mental health issues. 4) Ensuring screening, early identification, referral and follow-up for suicide risk through Student Health Questionnaires for each student who accesses school-based health centers (SBHC). 5) Offering intensive training and technical assistance for all SBHCs surrounding identification of signs of suicide, suicide prevention, and crisis response planning. 6) Administering the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Youth Suicide Prevention grant, which includes: gatekeeper training for educators, medical and behavioral health providers, community members and youth; Natural Helper Programs in 10 additional schools; implementation and support for Gay-Straight Alliances; intensive training for school nurses; and psychiatric consultation for school counselors and SBHC providers. 7) Providing School Health Updates, the annual Head to Toe Conference, and other regional trainings to increase awareness and knowledge of suicide risk factors and warning signs among school counselors, school health personnel, and behavioral health providers on suicide, crisis response, and grief and trauma support in the school setting.

Evidence-based Practices

For reviews of evidence-based practices, please see: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html

Healthy People Objective MHMD-1:

Reduce the suicide rate
U.S. Target: 10.2 suicides per 100,000

Related Indicators

Relevant Population Characteristics:


Note

Suicide deaths were defined by underlying cause of death based on the International Classification of Diseases, version 10 (ICD-10) codes.  **No deaths during the time period.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Data Source: Geospatial and Population Studies Program, University of New Mexico. http://bber.unm.edu/bber_research_demPop.html.  

Measure Description for Suicide Death - Youth, 10-24 Years

Definition: The youth suicide death rate is defined as the number of deaths attributed to suicide among persons 10-24 years per 100,000 of the age group population.
Numerator: The total number of suicide deaths per year among persons 10-24 years.
Denominator: The estimated mid-year population of persons 10-24 years.

Indicator Profile Report

Suicide Among Youth Age 10-24 Years (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

01/20/2015

Data Owner

Injury Epidemiology, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N1100, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Tierney Murphy, by telephone at (505) 827-6816 or email to Tierney.Murphy@state.nm.us.




Child Abuse and Neglect: Ratio per 1,000 Children, State Fiscal Years 2014-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    15.4
    95% Confidence Interval (14.4 - 16.5)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    22.3
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

In New Mexico, child maltreatment includes physical neglect, sexual abuse and physical abuse. Child maltreatment can range from relatively minor (bruises or cuts) to severe (broken bones, acute subdural hematoma, or even death). In addition to these physical effects, additional outcomes of abuse or neglect may include behavioral changes, developmental delays or life-long disabilities. Regardless of the physical effects, the emotional pain and suffering they cause a child should not be minimized. Additionally, adults who experienced abuse or neglect during childhood are more likely to suffer from physical ailments such as allergies, arthritis, asthma, bronchitis, high blood pressure, and ulcers. The effects vary depending on the circumstances of the abuse or neglect and personal characteristics of the child. Also impactful is the child's environment, including the array of services available to the child and family to address the underlying issues which lead to child maltreatment. Consequences of abuse might be mild or severe, may disappear after a short period or last a lifetime. Child maltreatment can impact the child physically, psychologically, behaviorally, or in some combination of all three ways. Ultimately, due to related costs to public entities such as the health care, human services, and educational systems, abuse and neglect impact not just the child and family, but society as a whole.

Evidence-based Practices

New Mexico's Protective Services Division was selected by the Mountain and Plains Child Welfare Implementation Center (which is based at the University of Texas at Arlington) to receive Training and Technical Assistance to develop a new Practice model for the Division. The Practice Model project, called NM Pinon Project for CYFD, has been underway since November 2009 and it involves the entire Protective Services leadership team along with regional and field staff, foster parents, parents, children, youth, tribes, courts, providers and other stakeholders. The practice model is a framework of how Protective Services' employees, families, and stakeholders should unite in creating a physical and emotional environment that focuses on the safety, permanency, and well-being of children and their families. It contains definitions and explanations regarding how Protective Services as a whole will work internally and partner with families, service providers, tribes and other stakeholders in child welfare services. When Protective completes the Practice Model, we will: --Define how Protective Services engages families, youth, and the community in developing and delivering services that meet the unique needs of those served by the agency. --Define standards of practice. --Define how outcomes will be measured both quantitatively and qualitatively. --Incorporate a clear, written explanation of how Protective Services will successfully function. --Promote practice that is evidence informed and guided by values and principles, therefore increasing the likelihood of positive outcomes for children, youth, families, and the community. --Link Protective Services? policy, practice, training, supervision and quality assurance with its mission, vision, agency values and strategic plan.

Note

Data were compiled from the New Mexico Child Welfare data system for tracking reports and investigations of child abuse. Compiled data were obtained from CYFD Protective Services. It is possible that one investigated report may include multiple types of substantiated abuse of one or more children in a family. In addition, it is possible for an individual child to have more than one substantiated investigation of abuse or neglect for a single reporting period. 

Data Sources

New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department, PO Drawer 5160 Santa Fe, NM 87502-5160. Phone: (505)827-8400. Website: www.cyfd.org.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Child Abuse and Neglect

Definition: The ratio of substantiated victims or allegations of child abuse per 1,000 children under age 18.
Numerator: Number of substantiated victims or allegations of child abuse and/or neglect.
Denominator: Number of children under age 18.

Indicator Profile Report

Child Abuse Allegations (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

04/10/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Mental Health - Adult Self-reported Mental Distress: Percentage with Mental Distress, 2014-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    17.4%
    95% Confidence Interval (15.4% - 19.7%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    17.9%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Adult mental health issues range in a spectrum from day-to-day challenges with stress, anxiety, and "the blues", to persistent mental health challenges arising from chronic physical conditions such as diabetes, asthma, and obesity. to chronic clinically-diagnosable psychiatric morbidities such as anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression, to serious life-threatening situations such as suicidal ideation and suicide attempt, which sometimes result from a combination of the mental and physical health challenges mentioned above. A host of measures exist for assessing the mental health status of individuals, but characterizing the mental health status of the population is a relatively new field. If such an assessment can be done using a simple and non-invasive approach with a reasonable level of sensitivity and specificity, the resulting characterization of the population's mental health can help public health and mental health professionals better understand the distribution of mental health issues in the population and design better systems to help identify, address and mitigate these issues before they become more serious. Among measures that have been suggested by the CDC as potential tools for assessing population well-being and mental health is the frequency with which people experience poor mental health. This measure is based on the single question, "How many days during the past 30 days was your mental health not good?" Respondents who report that they experienced 14 or more days when their mental health was "not good" were classified as experiencing "Frequent Mental Distress" ("FMD"). Although FMD is not a clinical diagnosis, evidence suggests that it is associated with a person's mental health status. A 2011 study by Bossarte et al. concluded that 6 or more days of poor mental health ("Mental Distress") could be used as a valid and reliable indicator of generalized mental distress with strong associations to both diagnosable depressive symptomology and serious mental illness.

How Are We Doing?

The prevalence of Mental Distress in NM has consistently been similar to the overall US prevalence since 2004. Before 2011 (when the survey stratification methodology changed), the prevalence of Mental Distress among adults increased slightly from 16.8% in 2004 to 18.5% in 2010. Since 2011, the prevalence of Mental Distress in NM has remained relatively stable. In 2016, 18.6% of adults in NM reported 6 or more days of poor mental health in the past 30 days.

What Is Being Done?

The Department of Health Epidemiology and Response Division conducts ongoing surveillance for indicators of mental health among students and adults in every county of New Mexico. The Human Services Department recently modernized the New Mexico Medicaid system by integrating physical and behavioral health services which will help treat an individual in a more holistic manner.

Evidence-based Practices

For reviews of evidence-based practices, please see: -US Preventive Services Task Force: [http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/] -Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Community Guide: [http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html] -Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: [https://www.samhsa.gov/nrepp]

Related Indicators

Relevant Population Characteristics:


Note

These data are from the NM Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a random-digit-dialed telephone survey of adults 18 years and older. It is conducted annually by the NM Department of Health Survey Unit in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Responses are weighted to reflect the general New Mexico adult population by age, sex, ethnicity, geographic region, marital status, education level, home ownership and type of phone ownership.  (#) Values are unstable (##) Values are very unstable (**) Data suppressed due to small numbers The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Mental Health - Adult Self-reported Mental Distress

Definition: Percentage of NM residents 18 years or older experiencing "Mental Distress", defined as answering 6 days or more to the question, "Now thinking about your mental health, which includes stress, depression, and problems with emotions, for how many days during the past 30 days was your mental health NOT good?"
Numerator: The number of survey respondents who reported "Mental Distress", defined as poor mental health for 6 or more of the past 30 days.
Denominator: Total number of survey respondents except those with missing, "Don't know/Not sure," and "Refused" responses.

Indicator Profile Report

Adult Mental Distress (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

10/04/2017

Data Owner

Mental Health Epidemiology, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N1320, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Carol Moss, by telephone at (505) 476-1440 or email to Carol.Moss@state.nm.us.




Mental Health - Youth Feeling Sad/Hopeless: Percentage Feeling Sad/Hopeless, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    33.8%
    95% Confidence Interval (30.8% - 37.0%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    32.5%
    U.S.
    29.9%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Feelings of sadness or hopelessness are a risk factor for depression. Students who report feelings of sadness or hopelessness are more likely than other students to report suicide attempts, cigarette smoking, binge drinking and illicit drug use. The prevalence of feelings of sadness or hopelessness among youth in NM and the US has remained relatively stable since 2001. In 2015, the prevalence among youth in NM (32.5%) was higher than that of the US (29.9%), although this difference was not statistically significant.

How Are We Doing?

The prevalence of feelings of sadness or hopelessness among youth in NM and the US has remained relatively stable since 2001, but the prevalence among youth in NM in 2015 is the highest it has been in 15 years.

What Is Being Done?

The Department of Health's Office of School and Adolescent Health provides training and funding for 66 school-based health clinics that provide both primary and behavioral health services for students. The Department of Health's Epidemiology and Response Division conducts ongoing surveillance for indicators of mental health among students and adults in every county of New Mexico. The Human Services Department recently modernized the New Mexico Medicaid system by integrating physical and behavioral health services in the Centennial Care program, which will help treat an individual in a more holistic manner. In a recent survey of behavioral health consumers in New Mexico, results showed that New Mexico ranks in the top half of states or above the national average regarding access to services, participation in treatment, and mental health workforce availability.

Evidence-based Practices

For reviews of evidence-based practices, please see: -US Preventive Services Task Force: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/ -Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?s Community Guide: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html -Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration?s National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: http://www.samhsa.gov/nrepp

Healthy People Objective MHMD-4.1:

Reduce the proportion of persons who experience major depressive episode (MDE): Adolescents aged 12 to 17 years
U.S. Target: 7.4 percent

Note

The NM Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey (YRRS) is administered in odd years and is part of the national Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBS), coordinated and designed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Each state, territorial, tribal, and large urban school district participating in YRBS employs a two-stage, cluster sample design to produce a representative sample of students in grades 9-12 in its jurisdiction. In the first sampling stage, in all except a few sites, schools are selected with probability proportional to school enrollment size. In the second sampling stage, intact classes of a required subject or intact classes during a required period (e.g., second period) are selected randomly. All students in sampled classes are eligible to participate. A weight is applied to each student record to adjust for student nonresponse and the distribution of students by grade, sex, and race/ethnicity in each jurisdiction.  (**) Data suppressed due to small numbers. (#) Values are unstable.

Data Sources

New Mexico Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, New Mexico Department of Health and Public Education Department.  

Measure Description for Mental Health - Youth Feeling Sad/Hopeless

Definition: Percentage of students grades 9-12 in a NM public school who felt so sad or hopeless almost every day for two weeks or more in a row that they stopped doing some usual activities during the past 12 months.
Numerator: Number of students who answered, "Yes", to the question, "During the past 12 months, did you ever feel so sad or hopeless almost every day for two weeks or more in a row that you stopped doing some usual activities?"
Denominator: Total number of respondents who answered the question, "During the past 12 months, did you ever feel so sad or hopeless almost every day for two weeks or more in a row that you stopped doing some usual activities?"

Indicator Profile Report

Youth With Persistent Feelings of Sadness and Hopelessness in the Past Year, Grades 9 - 12 (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/19/2017

Data Owner

Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, Survey Section, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health and Coordinated School Health & Wellness Bureau, NM Public Education Department. Contact NMDOH, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Telephone: (505) 476-1779.




Mental Health - Adult Depression: Percentage with Depression, 2011

  • Dona Ana County
    9.3
    95% Confidence Interval (6.6 - 12.9)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    10.3
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Depression is one of the most prevalent and treatable mental disorders. Major depression is usually associated with co-morbid mental disorders, such as anxiety and substance use disorders, and impairment of a person's ability to function in work, home, relationship, and social roles. Depression is also a risk factor for suicide and attempted suicide. In addition, depressive disorders have been associated with an increased prevalence of chronic medical conditions, such as heart disease, stroke, asthma, arthritis, cancer, diabetes, and obesity.

How Are We Doing?

In 2011, 10.3% of NM residents 18 years or older screened positive for current depression.

What Is Being Done?

The Department of Health Epidemiology and Response Division conducts ongoing surveillance for indicators of mental health among students and adults in every county of New Mexico. The Human Services Department recently modernized the New Mexico Medicaid system by integrating physical and behavioral health services in the Centennial Care program, which will help treat an individual in a more holistic manner. In the most recent year, HSD has seen an 84% increase in the number of individuals receiving behavioral health services throughout the state. This is an increase from the previous year, where the state saw a 30.4% increase in those being served. In addition, a recent survey of behavioral health consumers in New Mexico was conducted, and New Mexico ranks above the national average in categories such as access to services, participation in treatment, and outcomes from treatment.

Evidence-based Practices

For reviews of evidence-based practices, please see: -US Preventive Services Task Force: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/ -Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?s Community Guide: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html -Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration?s National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/Index.aspx

Healthy People Objective MHMD-4:

Reduce the proportion of persons who experience major depressive episode (MDE)
U.S. Target: Not applicable, see subobjectives in this category

Note

The Anxiety and Depression Module added to the BRFSS in 2011 included the first eight questions from the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8), an instrument that can establish a provisional depressive disorder diagnosis using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria. These eight questions ask how many days over the past two weeks the respondents experienced each of the eight symptoms. The number of days during which symptoms were reported were converted to points; the number of points were then summed across the 8 questions to determine the severity of depressive symptoms. A cut-off score of 10 points or more was used to define current depression.  (*) Values are unstable. (**) Data suppressed due to small numbers (***) Values are extremely unstable. The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Mental Health - Adult Depression

Definition: Percentage of NM residents 18 years or older who screened positive for current depression in the two weeks prior to taking a phone survey.
Numerator: Number of survey respondents who reported a total of 10 depressive symptom-days or more within the two weeks prior to survey.
Denominator: Number of survey respondents excluding those with missing, "Don't know/Not sure," and "Refused" responses.

Indicator Profile Report

Current Depression, Adults Aged 18+ (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

07/07/2015

Data Owner

Mental Health Epidemiology, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N1320, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Carol Moss, by telephone at (505) 476-1440 or email to Carol.Moss@state.nm.us.




Public Education - Math Proficiency: Percentage of Students Proficient or Above in Math, 2015-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    20.23
    95% Confidence Interval (18.72 - 21.74)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    20.14
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

[http://newmexicocommoncore.org/pages/view/35/new-math-standards-68/ From New Mexico Common Core Standards:] In middle school, multiplication and division develop into powerful forms of ratio and proportional reasoning. The properties of operations take on prominence as arithmetic matures into algebra. The theme of quantitative relationships also becomes explicit in grades 6-8, developing into the formal notion of a function by grade 8. Meanwhile, the foundations of high school deductive geometry are laid in the middle grades. Finally, the gradual development of data representations in grades K-5 leads to statistics in middle school: the study of shape, center and spread of data distributions; possible associations between two variables; and the use of sampling in making statistical decisions.

Related Indicators

Relevant Population Characteristics:


Note

County-level data were calculated by identifying and summarizing records from all schools located within each county, based only on those schools' physical locations (disregarding their school-district affiliation). The compiled county data therefore may not accurately reflect the schools' students' actual county(ies) of residence.

Data Sources

New Mexico Public Education Department, Jerry Apodaca Education Building, 300 Don Gaspar, Santa Fe NM 87501. Phone: (505)827-5800. Website: www.ped.state.nm.us.  

Measure Description for Public Education - Math Proficiency

Definition: The percentage of students who scored 'Proficient' or above on a standardized, grade-level assessment for math skills.
Numerator: The number of students who scored 'Proficient' or above on a standardized, grade-level assessment for math skills.
Denominator: The total number of students who completed a standardized, grade-level assessment for math skills.

Indicator Profile Report

The Percentage of 6th-Grade Students Scoring 'Proficient' or Above on a Standardized Math-Skills Assessment (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/21/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Public Education - Reading Proficiency: Percentage of Students Proficient or Above in Reading, 2015-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    34.8%
    95% Confidence Interval (33.0% - 36.5%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    25.4%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

[http://newmexicocommoncore.org/pages/view/38/new-ela-standards-k5/ New Mexico Common Core Standards] The end of third grade is a critical milestone for most students because it marks the point at which they must have mastered foundational language and literacy skills necessary to succeed in other subject areas in fourth grade and beyond. Students not reading proficiently by the end of third grade are four times more likely than proficient readers to drop out of high school. High-quality literacy instruction and systematic interventions result in increased academic achievement to ensure children are proficient readers by the end of third grade.

Note

County-level data were calculated by identifying and summarizing records from all schools located within each county, based only on those schools' physical locations (disregarding their school-district affiliation). The compiled county data therefore may not accurately reflect the schools' students' actual county(ies) of residence.

Measure Description for Public Education - Reading Proficiency

Definition: The percentage of students who scored 'Proficient' or above on a standardized, grade-level assessment for English reading skills.
Numerator: The number of students who scored 'Proficient' or above on a standardized, grade-level assessment for English reading skills.
Denominator: The total number of students who completed a standardized, grade-level assessment for English reading skills.

Indicator Profile Report

The Percentage of 3rd-Grade Students Scoring 'Proficient' or Above on a Standardized Reading-Skills Assessment (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/21/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Public Education - Science Proficiency: Percentage of Students Proficient or Above in Science, 2015-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    36.1%
    95% Confidence Interval (34.3% - 37.9%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    39.4%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

[http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RST/11-12/ From the Common Core State Standards Initiative, Grades 6-12 Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, & Technical Subjects:] Key Ideas and Details: Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science and technical texts, attending to important distinctions the author makes and to any gaps or inconsistencies in the account. Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; summarize complex concepts, processes, or information presented in a text by paraphrasing them in simpler but still accurate terms. Follow precisely a complex multistep procedure when carrying out experiments, taking measurements, or performing technical tasks; analyze the specific results based on explanations in the text. Craft and Structure: Determine the meaning of symbols, key terms, and other domain-specific words and phrases as they are used in a specific scientific or technical context relevant to grades 11-12 texts and topics. Analyze how the text structures information or ideas into categories or hierarchies, demonstrating understanding of the information or ideas. Analyze the author's purpose in providing an explanation, describing a procedure, or discussing an experiment in a text, identifying important issues that remain unresolved. Integration of Knowledge and Ideas: Integrate and evaluate multiple sources of information presented in diverse formats and media (e.g., quantitative data, video, multimedia) in order to address a question or solve a problem. Evaluate the hypotheses, data, analysis, and conclusions in a science or technical text, verifying the data when possible and corroborating or challenging conclusions with other sources of information. Synthesize information from a range of sources (e.g., texts, experiments, simulations) into a coherent understanding of a process, phenomenon, or concept, resolving conflicting information when possible. Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity: By the end of grade 12, read and comprehend science/technical texts in the grades 11-CCR text complexity band independently and proficiently.

Healthy People Objective AH-5:

Increase educational achievement of adolescents and young adults
U.S. Target: Not applicable, see subobjectives in this category

Related Indicators

Relevant Population Characteristics:


Note

County-level data were calculated by identifying and summarizing records from all schools located within each county, based only on those schools' physical locations (disregarding their school-district affiliaiton). The compiled county data therefore may not accurately reflect the schools' students' actual county(ies) of residence.

Data Sources

New Mexico Public Education Department, Jerry Apodaca Education Building, 300 Don Gaspar, Santa Fe NM 87501. Phone: (505)827-5800. Website: www.ped.state.nm.us.  

Measure Description for Public Education - Science Proficiency

Definition: The percentage of students who scored 'Proficient' or above on a standardized, grade-level assessment for science skills.
Numerator: The number of students who scored 'Proficient' or above on a standardized, grade-level assessment for science skills.
Denominator: The total number of students who completed a standardized, grade-level assessment for science skills.

Indicator Profile Report

The Percentage of 11th-Grade Students Scoring 'Proficient' or Above on a Standardized Science-Skills Assessment (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/21/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




General Health Status: Percentage in Fair/Poor Health, 2013-2015

  • Dona Ana County
    25.2%
    95% Confidence Interval (23.0% - 27.5%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    20.8%
    U.S.
    16.5%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Self-rated health (SRH) has been collected for many years on National Center for Health Statistics surveys and since 1993 on the state-based BRFSS. SRH is an independent predictor of important health outcomes including mortality, morbidity, and functional status. It is considered to be a reliable indicator of a person's perceived health and is a good global assessment of a person's well being.

Note

Question wording: "Would you say that in general your health is excellent, very good, good, fair or poor?"  **Percentages based on fewer than 50 completed surveys are not shown because they do not meet the DOH standard for data release. The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for General Health Status

Definition: Percentage of adults aged 18 years and older who reported fair or poor general health.
Numerator: Number of survey respondents who reported fair or poor general health.
Denominator: Total number of survey respondents except those with missing, "Don't know/Not sure," and "Refused" responses.

Indicator Profile Report

General Health Status: Self-reported Fair or Poor Health (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

12/28/2016

Data Owner

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Telephone: (505) 476-3595.




: Life Expectancy from Age 65 (Number of Years), 2014-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    21.5
    95% Confidence Interval (21.5 - 21.6)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    20.4
    U.S.
    19.4
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Note

U.S. value is 2014.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.   U.S. Data: National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  

Measure Description for

Definition:
Numerator:
Denominator:

Indicator Profile Report

Life Expectancy from Age 65 (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated





Life Expectancy From Birth: Life Expectancy from Birth (Number of Years), 2014-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    80.6
    95% Confidence Interval (80.5 - 80.7)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    77.8
    U.S.
    78.8
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Life Expectancy is often used to gauge the overall health of a community. Shifts in life expectancy are often used to describe trends in mortality. Being able to predict how populations will age has enormous implications for the planning and provision of services and supports. Small increases in life expectancy translate into large increases in the population. As the life expectancy of a population lengthens, the number of people living with chronic illnesses tends to increase because chronic illnesses are more common among older persons.

Data Sources

New Mexico Death Data: Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.   U.S. Data: National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  

Measure Description for Life Expectancy From Birth

Definition: Life expectancy is an estimate of the expected average number of years of life (or a person's age at death) for individuals who were born into a particular population.
Numerator: Not applicable. For information on life expectancy calculation, please see http://ibis.health.state.nm.us/resource/LifeExp.html.
Denominator: See numerator note.

Indicator Profile Report

Life Expectancy From Birth (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/27/2016

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Physical Activity - Adult Prevalence: Percentage with Recommended Activity, 2011, 2013, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    53.4%
    95% Confidence Interval (50.5% - 56.2%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    56.0%
    U.S.
    51.0%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Physical activity among adults has numerous benefits, including: reducing risk of heart disease and stroke, improving physical fitness, bone health and mental health, preventing high blood pressure, abnormal cholesterol, prediabetes and diabetes, maintaining health weight and increasing mobility. Among older adults, physical activity is crucial in preventing falls.

How Are We Doing?

Since 2001, the percentage of adults in New Mexico who meet physical activity recommendations has remained static, which is similar to the trend in the US.

Evidence-based Practices

To increase physical activity using informational approaches, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services recommends community-wide campaigns and point-of-decision prompts. To increase physical activity using behavioral or social approaches, the Task Force recommends school-based physical education, individually-adapted health behavior change programs, and social support interventions in community settings. To increase physical activity using environmental or policy approaches, the Task Force recommends creation of or enhanced access to places for physical activity combined with informational outreach activities, and point-of-decision prompts. For more information, please see the Guide to Community Preventive SErvices: Waht Works to Promote Health? Chapter 2, Physical Activity, http://www.thecommunityguide.org/library/book/index.html.

Healthy People Objective PA-2.1:

Increase the proportion of adults who engage in aerobic physical activity of at least moderate intensity for at least 150 minutes/week, or 75 minutes/week of vigorous intensity, or an equivalent combination
U.S. Target: 47.9 percent

Note

The physical activity questions are administered only in odd years.  U.S. value is the median of all U.S. states and D.C. for 2013. Starting in 2011, the definition for the U.S. values changed to "150 minutes or more of aerobic physical activity per week." Prior to that, the U.S. definition was "30 minutes of moderate physical activity five 5+ days per week, or vigorous physical activity for 20+ minutes three or more days per week." **Data were not available for some counties due to insufficient numbers of people (fewer than 50) from those counties who were surveyed in the BRFSS. The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Physical Activity - Adult Prevalence

Definition: Among adults, the proportion who engage in aerobic physical activity of at least moderate intensity for at least 150 minutes/week, or 75 minutes/week of vigorous intensity, or an equivalent combination.
Numerator: Number of adults meeting physical activity recommendations from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
Denominator: Number of adults from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System

Indicator Profile Report

Adults With Recommended Physical Activity (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

12/29/2016

Data Owner

Nutrition, Obesity and Physical Activity Program, Chronic Disease Prevention and Control Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health, Public Health Division, 5301 Central Ave. NE, Suite 800, Albuquerque, NM 87108, Telephone: (505) 841-5840. For inquiries, contact the Medical Director/Epidemiologist, Susan Baum, MD, MPH (email: susan.baum@state.nm.us).




Physical Activity - Adolescent Prevalence: Percentage with Daily Activity, 2013

  • Dona Ana County
    30.5%
    95% Confidence Interval (26.6% - 34.8%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    31.1%
    U.S.
    27.1%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Physical activity is crucial to maintaining physical health. Among adolescents, regular physical activity helps improve bone health, body weight and composition, physical fitness and mental health. In addition, active adolescents are more likely to become active adults.

What Is Being Done?

NM Healthier Weight Council's Community and Regional Planning Advisory Group is working to increase awareness among elected officials, health professionals, community planners, and other key stakeholders on the impact of the built environment on physical activity.

Evidence-based Practices

To increase physical activity using informational approaches, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services recommends community-wide campaigns and point-of-decision prompts. To increase physical activity using behavioral or social approaches, the Task Force recommends school-based physical education, individually-adapted health behavior change programs, and social support interventions in community settings. To increase physical activity using environmental or policy approaches, the Task Force recommends creation of or enhanced access to places for physical activity combined with informational outreach activities, and point-of-decision prompts. For more information, please see the Guide to Community Preventive SErvices: Waht Works to Promote Health? Chapter 2, Physical Activity, http://www.thecommunityguide.org/library/book/index.html.

Healthy People Objective PA-3.1:

Increase the proportion of adolescents who meet current Federal physical activity guidelines for aerobic physical activity and for muscle-strengthening activity: Aerobic physical activity
U.S. Target: 20.2 percent

Note

Rates for Chaves County, Harding County, and Union County were supressed because of inadequate response rates from those counties. The NM rate was calculated from the standard CDC YRRS dataset and is consistent with the rates found on the CDC Website. The county rates were calculated from a special New Mexico dataset that has a larger survey sample size.

Data Sources

New Mexico Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, New Mexico Department of Health and Public Education Department.  

Measure Description for Physical Activity - Adolescent Prevalence

Definition: Students who were physically active for a total of at least 60 minutes per day
Numerator: Number of students who answered, "7 days", to the question, "During the past 7 days, on how many days were you physically active for a total of at least 60 minutes per day? (Add up all the time you spent in any kind of physical activity that increased your heart rate and made you breathe hard some of the time.)"
Denominator: Number of students who answered the question, "During the past 7 days, on how many days were you physically active for a total of at least 60 minutes per day?

Indicator Profile Report

Adolescent Physical Activity (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

11/26/2014

Data Owner

Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, Survey Section, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health and Coordinated School Health & Wellness Bureau, NM Public Education Department. Contact NMDOH, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Telephone: (505) 476-1779.




Nutrition - Adult Fruit and Vegetable Consumption: Percentage Consuming Five a Day, 2011, 2013, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    18.5%
    95% Confidence Interval (16.4% - 20.9%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    17.9%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Fruits and vegetables contain essential vitamins, minerals, fiber, and other compounds that may help prevent many chronic diseases. Compared with people who consume a diet with only small amounts of fruits and vegetables, those who eat more generous amounts as part of a healthful diet are likely to have reduced risk of chronic diseases, including stroke and perhaps other cardiovascular diseases, and certain cancers (1). Fruits and vegetables also help people to achieve and maintain a healthy weight, because they are relatively low in energy density (2). To promote health and prevent chronic diseases, the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommend 2 cups of fruit per day for a standard 2,000 calorie diet, with recommendations based on an individual's age, gender, and activity level (3).

Evidence-based Practices

For persons to make healthy food choices, healthy food options must be available and accessible. Families living in low-income neighborhoods and rural areas of the state often have less access to healthier food and beverage choices than those in more urban, higher-income areas. Here are some things communities may do.(4) - Making healthy food choices available and affordable in public venues - Restricting availability of less healthy options in public venues - Improve Geographic Availability of Supermarkets in Underserved Areas - Provide Incentives to Food Retailers to Locate in and/or Offer Healthier Food and Beverage Choices in Underserved Areas - Improve Availability of Mechanisms for Purchasing Foods from Farms - Provide Incentives for the Production, Distribution, and Procurement of Foods from Local Farms- Institute Smaller Portion Size Options in Public Service Venues - Limit Advertisements of Less Healthy Foods and Beverages- Discourage Consumption of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages- Increase Support for Breastfeeding

Note

The fruit and vegetable (5-a-Day) consumption questions were administered only in odd years.  U.S. value is 2009. U.S. value is the median percentage across participating States and the District of Columbia (DC). **Data were not available for some counties due to insufficient numbers of people (fewer than 50) from those counties who were surveyed in the BRFSS. The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Nutrition - Adult Fruit and Vegetable Consumption

Definition: Percentage of adults who report consuming fruits and vegetables five or more times per day.
Numerator: Number of adults who report consuming fruits and vegetables five or more times per day
Denominator: Number of adults in the survey sample

Indicator Profile Report

Percentage of Adults Who Reported Consuming 5+ Fruits and Vegetables Each Day (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

12/29/2016

Data Owner

Nutrition, Obesity and Physical Activity Program, Chronic Disease Prevention and Control Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health, Public Health Division, 5301 Central Ave. NE, Suite 800, Albuquerque, NM 87108, Telephone: (505) 841-5840. For inquiries, contact the Medical Director/Epidemiologist, Susan Baum, MD, MPH (email: susan.baum@state.nm.us).




Nutrition - Adolescent Fruit and Vegetable Consumption: Percentage Consuming Five a Day, 2013

  • Dona Ana County
    18.9%
    95% Confidence Interval (16.2% - 21.9%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    22.5%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Fruits and vegetables contain essential vitamins, minerals, fiber, and other compounds that may help prevent many chronic diseases. Compared with people who consume a diet with only small amounts of fruits and vegetables, those who eat more generous amounts as part of a healthful diet are likely to have reduced risk of chronic diseases, including stroke and perhaps other cardiovascular diseases, and certain cancers (1). Fruits and vegetables also help people to achieve and maintain a healthy weight, because they are relatively low in energy density (2). To promote health and prevent chronic diseases, the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommend 2 cups of fruit per day for a standard 2,000 calorie diet, with recommendations based on an individual's age, gender, and activity level (3).

Evidence-based Practices

For persons to make healthy food choices, healthy food options must be available and accessible. Families living in low-income neighborhoods and rural areas of the state often have less access to healthier food and beverage choices than those in more urban, higher-income areas. Here are some things communities may do.(4) - Making healthy food choices available and affordable in public venues - Restricting availability of less healthy options in public venues - Improve Geographic Availability of Supermarkets in Underserved Areas - Provide Incentives to Food Retailers to Locate in and/or Offer Healthier Food and Beverage Choices in Underserved Areas - Improve Availability of Mechanisms for Purchasing Foods from Farms - Provide Incentives for the Production, Distribution, and Procurement of Foods from Local Farms- Institute Smaller Portion Size Options in Public Service Venues - Limit Advertisements of Less Healthy Foods and Beverages - Discourage Consumption of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages

Note

Rates for Chaves County, Harding County, and Union County were supressed because of inadequate response rates from those counties. The NM rate was calculated from the standard CDC YRRS dataset and is consistent with the rates found on the CDC Website. The county rates were calculated from a special New Mexico dataset that has a larger survey sample size.

Data Sources

New Mexico Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, New Mexico Department of Health and Public Education Department.  

Measure Description for Nutrition - Adolescent Fruit and Vegetable Consumption

Definition: Percentage of high school students who ate five or more servings of fruits or vegetables per day
Numerator: Number of high school students who ate a total of five or more servings of fruits and vegetables per day
Denominator: Number of students who responded to each of the questions about fruits or vegetables

Indicator Profile Report

Percentage of Adolescents Who Ate Five or More Servings of Fruits and Vegetables Daily (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

11/26/2014

Data Owner

Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, Survey Section, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health and Coordinated School Health & Wellness Bureau, NM Public Education Department. Contact NMDOH, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Telephone: (505) 476-1779.




Obesity - Adult Prevalence: Percentage Who Were Obese, 2012-2015

  • Dona Ana County
    29.8%
    95% Confidence Interval (27.6% - 32.1%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    28.8%
    U.S.
    29.8%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Obesity is associated with an increased risk for a number of chronic diseases, including heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and some cancers (endometrial, colon, kidney, esophageal, and post-menopausal breast cancer.) In both New Mexico and the United States, the percentage of adults who are obese, based on telephone survey data, has more than doubled since 1990. Excess weight also contributes to the development of arthritis, a chronic disease that is the leading cause of disability amongst adults in the nation and the state. Obesity has been identified as a super-priority for the New Mexico Department of Health along with diabetes and substance misuse.

How Are We Doing?

Mirroring national trends, New Mexico's rate of obesity continues to climb.

What Is Being Done?

- The New Mexico Department of Health's (DOH) Obesity, Nutrition and Physical Activity Program (ONAPA) is collaborating with state and local partners to implement sustainable obesity prevention strategies that integrate policy, systems and environmental approaches with direct nutrition education via the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Education Program (SNAP-Ed). This programmatic expansion allows ONAPA to reach the low-income adult population for the first time, specifically those participating in food assistance programs. Healthy Kids Healthy Communities (HKHC), ONAPA's key program, is building a strong partnership with NMSU Cooperative Extension Services to implement tasting and cooking demonstrations to increase exposure and access to healthy foods among the 40,000 low-income families and 16,000 low-income senior adults that receive services from food assistance sites across the state. Policy, systems and environmental changes coupled with direct nutrition education can have a positive impact on adult behavior and health and weight status where strategies are implemented. - Policy, systems, and environmental efforts to address obesity at the local level happens primarily in communities with high poverty rates through Healthy Kids Healthy Communities in coordination with over 400 state and local partners across New Mexico. With the addition of SNAP-Ed funding, HKHC expanded its reach from 9 to 15 counties. ONAPA is also partnering with 5 tribal organizations to help build sustainability and expand reach of obesity prevention efforts through impactful policy, systems and environmental changes in tribal communities. All projects support health-promoting behaviors and are consistent with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and Nutrition Services (FNS) mission of improving the likelihood that persons eligible for SNAP will have access to healthy and affordable food choices. - The statewide Healthy Hospitals Initiative (HHI), a collaborative partnership between ONAPA, DOH's Diabetes Prevention and Control Program and Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention Program, Envision New Mexico, and the New Mexico Hospital Association, aims to increase healthy eating and physical activity opportunities in hospitals for employees and visitors. In the assessment phase, baseline observational data is collected on hospital grounds (cafeteria, vending machines, and environmental supports for physical activity), wellness directors are interviewed on current policies, and an online survey of staff nutrition and physical activity behaviors is administered. Based on the data, the HHI leadership team is developing policy recommendations and building support for hospitals to create healthier environments. As hospitals begin to make positive policy and environmental changes, establish and expand worksite wellness initiatives, and facilitate on-site or virtual chronic disease self-management programs, employees and visitors will have increased access to healthy options which can, in turn, lead to better health and weight status.

Evidence-based Practices

To help communities in this effort, CDC initiated the Common Community Measures for Obesity Prevention Project (the Measures Project). The objective of the Measures Project was to identify and recommend a set of strategies and associated measurements that communities and local governments can use to plan and monitor environmental and policy-level changes for obesity prevention. This report describes the expert panel process that was used to identify 24 recommended strategies for obesity prevention and a suggested measurement for each strategy that communities can use to assess performance and track progress over time. The 24 strategies are divided into six categories: 1) strategies to promote the availability of affordable healthy food and beverages), 2) strategies to support healthy food and beverage choices, 3) a strategy to encourage breastfeeding, 4) strategies to encourage physical activity or limit sedentary activity among children and youth, 5) strategies to create safe communities that support physical activity, and 6) a strategy to encourage communities to organize for change. For more information, please see Kahn, et al., Recommended Community Strategies and Measurements to Prevent Obesity in the United States, [http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5807a1.htm http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5807a1.htm].

Healthy People Objective NWS-9:

Reduce the proportion of adults who are obese
U.S. Target: 30.5 percent

Note

Obesity is defined as having a Body Mass Index (BMI) equal to or greater than 30.0 kg/m2. BMI is calculated as: [[weight (in pounds) / [height (in inches)]2] x 703]. BMI is a measure of a person's weight in relationship to height. Obesity refers to excessive body fat. For most adults, BMI is strongly correlated with total body fat, and serves as a good surrogate measure for obesity.  U.S. value is the median percentage across participating States and the District of Columbia (DC). **Data were not available for some counties due to insufficient numbers of survey respondents (fewer than 50) from those counties who were surveyed in the BRFSS. The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Obesity - Adult Prevalence

Definition: The adult obesity prevalence is reported as the percent of BRFSS respondents whose self-reported height and weight corresponds to a Body Mass Index (BMI) equal to or greater than 30.0.
Numerator: Number of obese adults from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey.
Denominator: Number of adults from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey.

Indicator Profile Report

Obesity Among Adults (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

01/12/2017

Data Owner

Nutrition, Obesity and Physical Activity Program, Chronic Disease Prevention and Control Bureau, New Mexico Department of Health, Public Health Division, 5301 Central Ave. NE, Suite 800, Albuquerque, NM 87108, Telephone: (505) 841-5840. For inquiries, contact the Medical Director/Epidemiologist, Susan Baum, MD, MPH (email: susan.baum@state.nm.us).




Obesity - Adolescent Prevalence: Percentage Who Were Obese, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    15.3%
    95% Confidence Interval (13.1% - 17.7%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    15.6%
    U.S.
    13.9%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Overweight and obese youth are more likely to grow up to be overweight or obese as adults. In addition, they are at increased risk of exhibiting chronic disease risk factors such as diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol as youth and into adulthood. Overweight and obese youth also experience discrimination from their peers.

Evidence-based Practices

To help communities in this effort, CDC initiated the Common Community Measures for Obesity Prevention Project (the Measures Project). The objective of the Measures Project was to identify and recommend a set of strategies and associated measurements that communities and local governments can use to plan and monitor environmental and policy-level changes for obesity prevention. This report describes the expert panel process that was used to identify 24 recommended strategies for obesity prevention and a suggested measurement for each strategy that communities can use to assess performance and track progress over time. The 24 strategies are divided into six categories: 1) strategies to promote the availability of affordable healthy food and beverages), 2) strategies to support healthy food and beverage choices, 3) a strategy to encourage breastfeeding, 4) strategies to encourage physical activity or limit sedentary activity among children and youth, 5) strategies to create safe communities that support physical activity, and 6) a strategy to encourage communities to organize for change. For more information, please see Kahn, et al., Recommended Community Strategies and Measurements to Prevent Obesity in the United States, http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5807a1.htm.

Healthy People Objective NWS-10.3:

Reduce the proportion of children and adolescents who are considered obese: Adolescents aged 12 to 19 years
U.S. Target: 16.1 percent

Note

"Obese" is defined as having a Body Mass Index (BMI) that is at or above the 95th percentile based on age and sex, based on historical reference data. BMI is calculated as: [[weight (in pounds) / [height (in inches)]2] x 703].  Rates for Harding Countywere supressed because of inadequate response rates. The NM rate was calculated from the standard CDC YRRS dataset and is consistent with the rates found on the CDC Website. The county rates were calculated from a special New Mexico dataset that has a larger survey sample size.

Data Sources

New Mexico Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, New Mexico Department of Health and Public Education Department.  

Measure Description for Obesity - Adolescent Prevalence

Definition: The percentage of YRRS respondents whose self-reported height and weight corresponding to a Body Mass Index (BMI) equal to or greater than the 95th percentile for their age and sex.
Numerator: Number of high school students reporting heights and weights that results in a BMI that put them in the 95th percentile or higher for their age and sex from the Youth Risk & Resiliency Survey
Denominator: Number of students who reported height, weight, age, and sex.

Indicator Profile Report

Obesity Among Adolescents (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

02/08/2017

Data Owner

Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, Survey Section, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health and Coordinated School Health & Wellness Bureau, NM Public Education Department. Contact NMDOH, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Telephone: (505) 476-1779.




Food Insecurity: Percentage in Food Insecure Households, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    14.4%
    95% Confidence Interval DNA
    Statistical StabilityDNA
    New Mexico
    16.0%
    U.S.
    13.4%
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

The food insecurity rate in New Mexico was 16% in 2015, and for children, the rate was 25%. This means that one in four New Mexico children had limited or uncertain access to adequate food during the year. Although food insecurity is harmful to any individual, it can be particularly devastating among children because they are more vulnerable to potential long-term consequences for their future physical and mental health, academic achievement, and economic productivity. The first 1,000 days of a child's life (from the start of the mother's pregnancy through the child's second birthday) is an important window for shaping a child's mental and physical health throughout their lifetime.

How Are We Doing?

In 2015, 336,000 New Mexicans, including 125,000 children under age 18, lived in households that experienced food insecurity. McKinley, San Juan, and Luna Counties have the highest rates of food insecurity among all NM counties.

Data Sources

Feeding America, Map the Meal Gap Report. Downloaded from http://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Food Insecurity

Definition: Food insecurity refers to USDA's measure of lack of access, at times, to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members and limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate foods. Food insecure households are not necessarily food insecure all the time. Food insecurity may reflect a household's need to make trade-offs between important basic needs, such as housing or medical bills, and purchasing nutritionally adequate foods.
Numerator: The number of persons living in food-insecure households.
Denominator: The number of persons in the population.

Indicator Profile Report

Food Insecurity Rate (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

10/03/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Tobacco Use - Adult Smoking Prevalence: Percentage Current Smokers, 2014-2016 (Combined)

  • Dona Ana County
    15.9%
    95% Confidence Interval (13.7% - 18.3%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    17.9%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States. Smoking is initiated and established primarily during adolescence, with more than 80% of adult smokers first smoking before age 18. One in five adults and one in nine youth smoke in New Mexico. About half of all lifetime smokers will die early because of their tobacco use. In New Mexico, about 2,600 people die from tobacco use annually and another 78,000 are living with tobacco-related diseases. Annual smoking-related medical costs in New Mexico total $844 million. According to the CDC's SAMMEC (Smoking Attributable Mortality, Morbidity, and Economic Costs) website, smoking is responsible for a significant proportion of the deaths from numerous types of malignant neoplasms (e.g., lung, esophageal, and laryngeal cancers); from cardiovascular diseases (e.g., ischemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease); and from several respiratory diseases (e.g., bronchitis, emphysema, chronic airway obstruction). Combined, these smoking-related deaths make smoking the leading behavioral cause of death in the United States.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

According to the 2014 Surgeon General's Report on Smoking and Health, "damage from tobacco smoke is immediate. Tobacco smoke contains more than 7,000 chemicals and chemical compounds that reach your lungs every time you inhale. Your blood then carries the poisons to all parts of your body. These poisons damage DNA, which can lead to cancer; damage blood vessels and cause clotting, which can cause heart attacks and strokes; and damage the lungs, which can cause asthma attacks, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis."

How Are We Doing?

Although overall cigarette smoking continues to decline, smoking rates continue to be higher among certain population groups including people with lower levels of education or income, the uninsured, people with a disability, African Americans, and people who identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual. In addition, the landscape of tobacco use and nicotine addiction is changing in light of emerging products such as e-cigarettes, hookah, and a variety of flavored tobacco products. About 5% of NM adults and 24% of NM high school youth use e-cigarettes and many of these individuals are using them in combination with traditional cigarettes.

What Is Being Done?

The NM Tobacco Program has a five-year action plan for 2015-2020 to do the following work together with its contractors and other statewide partners. GOAL 1: Prevent Initiation of Tobacco Use among Youth and Young Adults Strategy 1a: Educate and inform stakeholders and decision-makers about evidence-based policies and programs to prevent initiation of tobacco use. Strategy 1b: Establish and strengthen tobacco-free policies in schools and on college or university campuses. GOAL 2: Eliminate Nonsmokers' Exposure to Secondhand Smoke Strategy 2a: Increase voluntary policies for smokefree multi-unit housing. Strategy 2b: Implement evidence-based mass-reach health communication interventions to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke. GOAL 3: Promote Quitting Tobacco Among Youth and Young Adults Strategy 3a: Support state quitline capacity Strategy 3b: Increase engagement of health care providers and systems to expand utilization of proven cessation methods Strategy 3c: Expand insurance coverage and availability of comprehensive cessation services Strategy 3d: Promote health systems changes to support tobacco cessation Strategy 3e: Implement evidence-based mass-reach health communication interventions to increase cessation and promote the quitline. GOAL 4: Identify and Eliminate Tobacco-Related Disparities (see Health Program Information section)

Evidence-based Practices

Addressing tobacco use is best done through a coordinated effort to establish tobacco-free policies and social norms, to promote and assist tobacco users to quit, and to prevent initiation of tobacco use. This comprehensive approach combines educational, clinical, regulatory, economic, and social strategies. Research has documented strong or sufficient evidence in the use of the following strategies: - Increasing the unit price of tobacco products - Restricting minors' access to tobacco products; restricting the time, place, and manner in which tobacco is marketed and sold - Strategic, culturally appropriate, and high impact health communication messages (mass media), including paid TV, radio, billboard, print, and web-based advertising at state and local levels - Ensuring that all patients seen in the health care system are screened for tobacco use, receive brief interventions to help them quit, and are offered more intensive counseling and low- or no-cost cessation medications; providing insurance coverage of tobacco use treatment; phone- and web-based cessation services are effective and can reach large numbers of tobacco users; - Passage of laws and policies in a comprehensive tobacco control effort to protect the public from secondhand exposure - Focusing tobacco prevention and cessation interventions on populations at greatest risk in an effort to reduce tobacco-related health disparities Sources: CDC. Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs - 2014 (www.cdc.gov/tobacco/stateandcommunity/best_practices/pdfs/2014/comprehensive.pdf) The Guide to Community Preventive Services: Tobacco Use - 2010 (www.thecommunityguide.org/tobacco/index.html)

Healthy People Objective TU-1.1:

Reduce tobacco use by adults: Cigarette smoking
U.S. Target: 12.0 percent

Note

**Percentages based on fewer than 50 completed surveys are not shown because they do not meet the DOH standard for data release. The following counties did not meet the DOH small numbers rule in the combined 2014-2016 dataset: DeBaca, Guadalupe, Harding The county-level BRFSS data used for this smoking indicator were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Tobacco Use - Adult Smoking Prevalence

Definition: A current smoker is defined as a person 18 years or older who has smoked more than 100 cigarettes in his or her lifetime and currently smokes every day or some days.
Numerator: Number of survey respondents who reported they were current cigarette smokers
Denominator: Total number of BRFSS survey respondents

Indicator Profile Report

Adult Smoking Prevalence (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/03/2017

Data Owner

Tobacco Use Prevention and Control Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 5301 Central Ave NE, Suite 800, Albuquerque, NM 87108. James Padilla, Tobacco Program Epidemiologist, (505) 841-5839, james.padilla@state.nm.us.




Tobacco Use - Youth Smoking Prevalence: Percentage Current Smokers, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    9.3%
    95% Confidence Interval (7.2% - 12.0%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    11.4%
    U.S.
    10.8%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Nicotine exposure in any form among youth and young adults can disrupt growth of brain circuits that control attention, learning, and susceptibility to addiction to other drugs (e.g., cocaine and methamphetamine.) Effects of nicotine exposure on youth brain development can be long-lasting, and can include lower impulse control and mood disorders. Young people who smoke are also in danger of nicotine addiction, reduced lung growth and function, and early cardiovascular disease. Shortness of breath and lower stamina due to smoking can affect athletic performance in youth and teens. Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States. Smoking is initiated and established primarily during adolescence, with more than 80% of adult smokers first smoking before age 18. One in five adults and one in five youth smoke in New Mexico. About half of all lifetime smokers will die early because of their tobacco use. In New Mexico, about 2,600 people die from tobacco use annually and another 78,000 are living with tobacco-related diseases. Annual smoking-related medical costs in New Mexico total $844 million.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

According to the 2014 Surgeon General's Report on Smoking and Health, "damage from tobacco smoke is immediate. Tobacco smoke contains more than 7,000 chemicals and chemical compounds that reach your lungs every time you inhale. Your blood then carries the poisons to all parts of your body. These poisons damage DNA, which can lead to cancer; damage blood vessels and cause clotting, which can cause heart attacks and strokes; and damage the lungs, which can cause asthma attacks, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis."

Evidence-based Practices

Addressing tobacco use is best done through a coordinated effort to establish tobacco-free policies and social norms, to promote and assist tobacco users to quit, and to prevent initiation of tobacco use. This comprehensive approach combines educational, clinical, regulatory, economic, and social strategies. Research has documented strong or sufficient evidence in the use of the following strategies: - Increasing the unit price of tobacco products - Restricting minors' access to tobacco products; restricting the time, place, and manner in which tobacco is marketed and sold - Strategic, culturally appropriate, and high impact health communication messages (mass media), including paid TV, radio, billboard, print, and web-based advertising at state and local levels - Ensuring that all patients seen in the health care system are screened for tobacco use, receive brief interventions to help them quit, and are offered more intensive counseling and low- or no-cost cessation medications; providing insurance coverage of tobacco use treatment; phone- and web-based cessation services are effective and can reach large numbers of tobacco users; - Passage of laws and policies in a comprehensive tobacco control effort to protect the public from secondhand exposure - Focusing tobacco prevention and cessation interventions on populations at greatest risk in an effort to reduce tobacco-related health disparities Sources: CDC. Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs - 2014 (www.cdc.gov/tobacco/stateandcommunity/best_practices/pdfs/2014/comprehensive.pdf) The Guide to Community Preventive Services: Tobacco Use - 2010 (www.thecommunityguide.org/tobacco/index.html)

Healthy People Objective TU-2.2:

Reduce tobacco use by adolescents: Cigarettes (past month)
U.S. Target: 16.0 percent

Note

**Data are not available for some counties (Catron and Harding) due to lack of participation in the YRRS by one or more school districts or insufficient sample size. County-level YRRS estimates come from the larger NM sample dataset, while state-level YRRS estimates come from the smaller CDC sample.

Data Sources

New Mexico Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, New Mexico Department of Health and Public Education Department.  

Measure Description for Tobacco Use - Youth Smoking Prevalence

Definition: A current smoker is defined as a youth in grades 9-12 in a NM public high school who smoked cigarettes on one or more days in the past month.
Numerator: Number of youth who reported smoking cigarettes on one or more days in the past month
Denominator: All youth who participated in the YRRS

Indicator Profile Report

Youth Cigarette Smoking Prevalence (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

12/22/2016

Data Owner

Tobacco Use Prevention and Control Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 5301 Central Ave NE, Suite 800, Albuquerque, NM 87108. James Padilla, Tobacco Program Epidemiologist, (505) 841-5839, james.padilla@state.nm.us.




Mental Health - Adult Suicidal Ideation 2011: Percentage Who Considered Suicide, 2011

  • Dona Ana County
    4.1%
    95% Confidence Interval (2.5% - 6.9%)
    Statistical StabilityUnstable
    New Mexico
    5.7%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Suicidal ideation refers to thoughts of suicide or wanting to take one's own life, and is a risk factor for suicide or attempted suicide. Suicide rates in NM have been at least twice the national rate since at least 1995. Due to the disproportionate rate of suicide occurring in New Mexico for decades and the rising rate of suicide nationwide, understanding the prevalence of risk factors for suicide and the disparities in the New Mexico population is critical for prevention planning. Prior suicide attempts have been shown to be the strongest risk factor for suicide, and more than half of suicide attempts occur within one year of the onset of suicide ideation. Based on this knowledge of suicidal behavior, the World Health Organization and the United States Office of the Surgeon General have recommended routine surveillance for suicidal behavior such as attempts and ideation. In doing so, suicide prevention plans can be targeted specifically at communities with high risk and evaluated more thoroughly.

How Are We Doing?

According to the 2011 BRFSS, the prevalence of thinking about suicide among adults was 5.7% in 2011.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Department of Health collects, analyzes, and disseminates suicide death data in order to identify populations with disproportionately high rates of suicide. These data can be used in conjunction with community partners to develop and implement prevention and intervention efforts to reduce suicide deaths. The NMDOH Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics collects information on all NM deaths and produces annual suicide statistics. The NM Violent Death Reporting System was implemented in 2005 to add to the understanding of how and why violent deaths occur. This active surveillance system collects comprehensive information about all violent deaths, including suicide, by linking data from death certificates, medical examiner records, and law enforcement reports into one complete record. In addition, the NM Child Fatality Review Program Suicide Panel completes an in-depth case review of suicides among children through age 17 years and makes recommendations about how to prevent future deaths.

Evidence-based Practices

For reviews of evidence-based practices, please see: 1. US Preventive Services Task Force: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/ 2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Community Guide: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html 3. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/Index.aspx

Note

**Less than 50 respondents; measures not reported. The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Mental Health - Adult Suicidal Ideation 2011

Definition: Percentage of NM residents 18 years or older experiencing suicidal ideation, defined as answering "Yes" to the question, "In the past year, have you felt so low at times that you thought about committing suicide?"
Numerator: Number of survey respondents who reported thinking about committing suicide within the year prior to survey.
Denominator: Number of survey respondents excluding those with missing, "Don't know/Not sure," and "Refused" responses.

Indicator Profile Report

Adult Suicidal Ideation (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

11/23/2015

Data Owner

Mental Health Epidemiology, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Room N1320, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Carol Moss, by telephone at (505) 476-1440 or email to Carol.Moss@state.nm.us.




Mental Health - Youth Seriously Considered Suicide: Percentage Considered Suicide, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    16.1
    95% Confidence Interval (13.7 - 18.8)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    16.5
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Suicide is a complex behavior with no single determining cause. Seriously considering suicide is a form of suicidal ideation. Suicidal ideation refers to thoughts of suicide or wanting to take one's own life. Suicidal ideation is a risk factor for suicide attempts as well as completed suicide.

How Are We Doing?

The percentage of NM high school students seriously considering suicide has decreased from 22.0% in 2001 to 16.5% in 2015.

What Is Being Done?

The NM Department of Health continues to analyze and share data, reports and presentations with each year of completed YRRS surveys. School administrators and youth health advocates utilize this information to guide health promotion and treatment programs for youth in NM. Youth suicide prevention and intervention activities were initially funded by the NM Legislature in June 2005. Implementation of suicide prevention strategies statewide is a significant focus of the NM Department of Health's Office of School and Adolescent Health (OSAH). Suicide prevention activities include: 1) Providing funding for statewide crisis line response to people at risk for suicide. 2) Identifying and developing relationships with existing crisis line operators statewide to enhance statewide suicide crisis response capacity. 3) Raising awareness that suicide is a public health problem and supporting initiatives to decrease stigma surrounding mental health issues. 4) Ensuring screening, early identification, referral and follow-up for suicide risk through Student Health Questionnaires for each student who accesses school-based health centers (SBHC). 5) Offering intensive training and technical assistance for all school-based health centers surrounding identification of signs of suicide, suicide prevention and crisis response planning. 6) Gatekeeper training for educators, Medical and Behavioral Health providers, community members and youth; Natural Helper Programs; implementation and support for Gay-Straight Alliances; intensive training for school nurses; and psychiatric consultation for school counselors and school-based health center providers. 7) Providing School Health Updates, Head to Toe Conference and other regional trainings to increase awareness and knowledge of the risk factors and warning signs of suicide among school counselors, school health personnel, and behavioral health providers on suicide, crisis response and grief and trauma support in the school setting.

Evidence-based Practices

For reviews of evidence-based practices, please see: -US Preventive Services Task Force: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/ -Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?s Community Guide: http://www.thecommunityguide.org/index.html -Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration?s National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: http://www.samhsa.gov/nrepp

Note

The NM Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey (YRRS) is administered in odd years and is part of the national Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS), coordinated and designed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Each state, territorial, tribal, and large urban school district participating in YRBS employs a two-stage, cluster sample design to produce a representative sample of students in grades 9?12 in its jurisdiction. In the first sampling stage, in all except a few sites, schools are selected with probability proportional to school enrollment size. In the second sampling stage, intact classes of a required subject or intact classes during a required period (e.g., second period) are selected randomly. All students in sampled classes are eligible to participate. A weight is applied to each student record to adjust for student nonresponse and the distribution of students by grade, sex, and race/ethnicity in each jurisdiction.  (**) Data suppressed due to small numbers (#) Values are unstable

Data Sources

New Mexico Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, New Mexico Department of Health and Public Education Department.  

Measure Description for Mental Health - Youth Seriously Considered Suicide

Definition: Percentage of students grades 9-12 in a NM public school who reported that they seriously considered suicide at least once in past 12 months.
Numerator: Number of students who answered, "Yes", to the question, "During the past 12 months, did you ever seriously consider attempting suicide?"
Denominator: Total number of respondents who answered the question, "During the past 12 months, did you ever seriously consider attempting suicide?"

Indicator Profile Report

Youth Who Seriously Considered Suicide in the Past Year, Grades 9 - 12 (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/19/2017

Data Owner

Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, Survey Section, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health and Coordinated School Health & Wellness Bureau, NM Public Education Department. Contact NMDOH, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Telephone: (505) 476-1779.




Caring and Supportive Relationship in the Family: Percentage of Students, 2011

  • Dona Ana County
    41.6%
    95% Confidence Interval (37.0% - 46.4%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    48.2%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Caring and supportive relationship in the family refer to the interactions between youth and parents or guardians that convey love, acceptance, and affirmation. Students who report high levels of this relationship are less likely to use alcohol, drugs, or tobacco; to be involved in violence; to experience suicidal ideation; or to engage in high risk sexual practices.

Note

The Chaves county rate has been suppressed because the population sample was not representative of Chaves County.

Data Sources

New Mexico Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, New Mexico Department of Health and Public Education Department.  

Measure Description for Caring and Supportive Relationship in the Family

Definition: Students in grades 9-12 who reported that they had a parent or some other adult in the home who was interested in them, talked with them about their problems, and listened to them when they had something to say.
Numerator: Students who responded positively to each of the following series of questions: How true do you feel these statements are for you? In my home, there is a parent or some other adult? ...who is interested in my school work. ...who talks with me about my problems. ...who listens to me when I have something to say.
Denominator: Total number of students in grades 9-12 who responded to the questions above.

Indicator Profile Report

Youth With a Caring and Supportive Relationship in the Family (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

10/12/2013

Data Owner

Youth Risk and Resiliency Survey, Survey Section, Epidemiology and Response Division, New Mexico Department of Health and Coordinated School Health & Wellness Bureau, NM Public Education Department. Contact NMDOH, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Telephone: (505) 476-1779.




Birth Mothers' Educational Attainment: High School Degree or Higher: Mothers Who Completed High School or Higher, 2016

  • Dona Ana County
    75.4%
    95% Confidence Interval (73.8% - 77.0%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    79.9%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

A mother's education level affects decisions directly influencing her and her children's health. Worldwide, higher maternal education is linked to decreases in low birth weight, infant mortality, and maternal mortality. Level of education is related to children's physical health and academic outcomes, both as children and adults. Maternal education is associated with children's nutritional status and potential obesity. Children of mothers with a high school diploma or less have a higher likelihood of adolescent obesity. Higher education levels are associated with maternal reproductive decisions including contraceptive use, having fewer children, and a later age of marriage.

Healthy People Objective FP-8:

Reduce pregnancy rates among adolescent females
U.S. Target: Not applicable, see subobjectives in this category

Note

Includes New Mexico RESIDENT births.  (**) Data suppressed due to small numbers.

Data Sources

Birth Certificate Data, Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.  

Measure Description for Birth Mothers' Educational Attainment: High School Degree or Higher

Definition: Percentage of live births to women who had completed high school or higher.
Numerator: Number of live-born infants born to women who had completed high school or higher.
Denominator: Total number of live-born infants.

Indicator Profile Report

The Percentage of Live Births to Women Who Had Completed a High School Degree or Higher (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

10/04/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Public Education - Free and Reduced Price Lunch Eligibility: Eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch, 2016-2017

  • Dona Ana County
    77.1%
    95% Confidence Interval (76.7% - 77.5%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    69.7%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

The National School Lunch Program provides nutritionally balanced, low-cost or free lunches to school children. Participation in the free and reduced price lunch program can reduce childhood food insecurity and allow children to have access to more nutritious foods. Food insecurity and related under-nutrition can negatively impact children's development and school performance. Having adequate nutrition promotes growth and development and reduces chronic disease risk.

Data Sources

New Mexico Public Education Department, Jerry Apodaca Education Building, 300 Don Gaspar, Santa Fe NM 87501. Phone: (505)827-5800. Website: www.ped.state.nm.us.  

Measure Description for Public Education - Free and Reduced Price Lunch Eligibility

Definition: The percentage of students eligible for the Free and Reduced Price Lunch program.
Numerator: Number of enrolled students eligible for free or reduced price lunch.
Denominator: Number of enrolled students.

Indicator Profile Report

The Percentage of Students Eligible for the Free and Reduced Price Lunch Program (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/21/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Public Education - Habitual Truancy: Habitually Truant Students, 2013-2014

  • Dona Ana County
    22.1%
    95% Confidence Interval (21.7% - 22.5%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    15.5%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

School attendance impacts school achievement and college or career readiness. Chronic absenteeism can be an indicator of difficult circumstances in a student's life. Frequent school absences are associated with risk behaviors and habitual absenteeism can be a predictor of dropping out. As a signal of other potential issues, habitual truancy is an important point of intervention.

Healthy People Objective AH-5.6:

Decrease school absenteeism among adolescents due to illness or injury
U.S. Target: 13.1 percent

Note

County level estimates based on school district percentages. Due to imperfect school district and county boundary correspondence, school districts corresponding to multiple counties were assigned to county based on the county location of the majority of schools in the district. This estimation results in a slight overestimation of percentages for Dona Ana, and Rio Arriba counties and a slight underestimation for Otero, Sandoval, and Torrance counties. This estimation also results in a potential discrepancy for Bernalillo and Santa Fe counties.

Data Sources

New Mexico Public Education Department, Jerry Apodaca Education Building, 300 Don Gaspar, Santa Fe NM 87501. Phone: (505)827-5800. Website: www.ped.state.nm.us.  

Measure Description for Public Education - Habitual Truancy

Definition: The percentage of students classified as habitually truant. Habitually truant refers to a student who has accumulated the equivalent of ten or more unexcused absences within a school year. Unexcused absence is an absence from school or a class for which the student does not have an allowable excuse.
Numerator: The number of students classified as habitually truant.
Denominator: The number of enrolled students.

Indicator Profile Report

The Percentage of Students Classified as Habitually Truant (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/23/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Health Insurance Coverage: Percentage Uninsured, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    13.7%
    95% Confidence Interval (11.3% - 16.1%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    13.1%
    U.S.
    10.9%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Lack of health insurance coverage has been associated with delayed access to health care and increased risk of chronic disease and mortality. People without health insurance are much less likely than those with insurance to receive recommended preventive services and medications, are less likely to have access to regular care by a personal physician and are less able to obtain needed health care services. Consequently, the uninsured are more likely to succumb to preventable illnesses, more likely to suffer complications from those illnesses, and more likely to die prematurely.

How Are We Doing?

The percentage of children (under age 19) in New Mexico without health care coverage has been declining and is currently higher than, but close to the U.S. percentage. For other age groups, the New Mexico percentage has been relatively stable and higher than the U.S. percentage.

What Is Being Done?

New Mexico's Human Services Department administers several programs aimed at reducing the number of uninsured New Mexicans. These programs include health insurance coverage for pregnant women, children, working disabled individuals, financially-eligible families, employees of nonprofits and small businesses. The New Mexico Medical Insurance Pool provides access to health insurance coverage to New Mexicans who are denied health insurance and considered uninsurable and also provides health benefit portability coverage to those who have exhausted COBRA benefits.

Healthy People Objective AHS-1:

Increase the proportion of persons with health insurance
U.S. Target: Not applicable, see subobjectives in this category

Note

Data obtained from the US Census Small Area Health Insurance Estimates (SAHIE) are based on a model that uses data from other census products. For more information see the SAHIE website at: http://www.census.gov/did/www/sahie/index.html.

Data Sources

U.S. Census Bureau, Small Area Health Insurance Estimates, http://www.census.gov/did/www/sahie/data/interactive/.  

Measure Description for Health Insurance Coverage

Definition: The percentage of New Mexicans with and without health insurance coverage, and by type of coverage at the time of the survey.
Numerator: Number of persons in the survey sample who were in the given category (e.g., uninsured, insured by Medicaid, etc.) at the time of the survey.
Denominator: Total number of persons in the survey sample

Indicator Profile Report

Health Insurance Coverage (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/20/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Prenatal Care in the First Trimester: Percentage with First Trimester Prenatal Care, 2016

  • Dona Ana County
    54.9%
    95% Confidence Interval (53.0% - 56.7%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    63.4%
    U.S.
    77.2%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Prenatal care is the health care a woman gets while she is pregnant. Health care providers recommend that women begin prenatal care in the first trimester of their pregnancy. Regular, recommended prenatal care reduces the risk of pregnancy-related complications for the mother and infant and increases a woman's chances of having healthy baby at full term.

What Is Being Done?

NM is one of six states participating in the Collaborative Innovations Networks (COIIN). This was a national effort focusing on Safe Sleep, Smoking Cessation, Interconception Care, Perinatal Regionalization, and reducing non-medically indicated C-sections and inductions before 39 weeks. NM was selected as one of four states to participate in the National Governor's Association Initiative to improve birth outcomes in 2013. This initiative involves key leadership from the Governor's Office, Department of Health, University of NM, NM Primary Care Association, NM Hospital Association, March of Dimes, Managed Care Organizations, CYFD, members of the provider community and other key stakeholders working together to align efforts toward improving birth outcomes.

Healthy People Objective MICH-10.1:

Prenatal care beginning in first trimester
U.S. Target: 77.9 percent

Data Sources

Birth Certificate Data, Bureau of Vital Records and Health Statistics (BVRHS), New Mexico Department of Health.   U.S. Data Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/.  

Measure Description for Prenatal Care in the First Trimester

Definition: The percentage of live births in the reporting period for which prenatal care was received in the first trimester.
Numerator: Number of live births in the reporting period for which prenatal care was received in the first trimester.
Denominator: Total number of live births in the reporting period. (Births where prenatal care was unreported were counted in the denominator.)

Indicator Profile Report

Prenatal Care in the First Trimester (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/11/2017

Data Owner

Maternal/Child Health Epidemiology Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, Santa Fe, 87502. Contact: Christopher Whiteside, MPH, Title V MCH Epidemiologist. 505-476-8825, Christopher.Whitesi@state.nm.us




Immunization - Childhood Coverage with 4:3:1:3:3:1:4, CASA Method: Percentage Fully Immunized, 2014

  • Dona Ana County
    82.0%
    95% Confidence Interval DNA
    Statistical StabilityDNA
    New Mexico
    91.9%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

By two years of age, it is recommended that all children should have received 4 doses of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTaP), 3 doses of polio, 1 dose of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR), 3 doses of Hepatitis B, 3 doses of Haemophilis Influenza, type B (Hib), and 1 dose of Varicella vaccine. This series is referred to in shorthand as "4:3:1:3:3:1." This graph shows estimated levels of 4:3:1:3:3:1 coverage by New Mexico County, which helps target interventions where they are most needed.

Evidence-based Practices

The New Mexico Department of Health provides quality improvement visits to Vaccines for Children providers to promote best practices for immunizations. Measuring and tracking coverage rates helps providers diagnose missed opportunities for immunizations. NMSIIS, the state on-line immunization registry, tracks immunizations received so that children can be recalled to be brought up-to-date for any needed shots. The CDC Community Guide at http://www.thecommunityguide.org/vaccines/universally/index.html provides evidence-based recommendations for universally-recommended immunizations.

Note

Immunization coverage surveys were conducted at offices of selected Vaccines for Children (VFC) providers. VFC is a national program administered through CDC to ensure that all children 0-18 years of age are eligible to receive recommended vaccines regardless of their family's ability to pay for them.  **Reliable county data were not available for all New Mexico counties.

Data Sources

NM Department of Health Immunization Program Vaccines for Children Provider Immunization Coverage Surveys (CASA method)  

Measure Description for Immunization - Childhood Coverage with 4:3:1:3:3:1:4, CASA Method

Definition: Children aged 24-35 months who have received the recommended vaccine series (4 DTaP, 3 Polio, 1 MMR, 3 HepB, 3 HIB,1 Varicella, and 4 Pneumococcal) by their second birthday.
Numerator: Children aged 24-35 months old who meet visit criteria (those who have had at least two visits to the surveyed provider in the past year, and at least 3 lifetime visits to the provider) and have received the complete 4:3:1:3:3:1:4 series by their second birthday.
Denominator: Children aged 24-35 months old who have had at least two visits to the surveyed provider in the past year, and at least 3 lifetime visits to the provider.

Indicator Profile Report

Childhood Immunization Coverage With 4:3:1:3:3:1:4, Rates (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

12/16/2016

Data Owner

New Mexico Immunization Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. St. Francis Drive, S-1264, Santa Fe, NM 87505. Contact: Cynthia Rawn, MPH, 505-827-0196, cynthia.rawn@state.nm.us




Immunization - Influenza Vaccination, Adults Age 65+: Percentage Immunized, 2012-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    60.9%
    95% Confidence Interval (57.5% - 64.1%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    56.9%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Recommended immunizations for adults aged 65 years and older include a yearly immunization against influenza (flu) and a one-time immunization against pneumococcal disease. Most of the deaths and serious illnesses caused by influenza and pneumococcal disease occur in older adults and others at increased risk for complications of these diseases because of other risk factors or medical conditions. Barriers to adult immunization include not knowing immunizations are needed, misconceptions about vaccines, and lack of recommendations from health care providers.

Evidence-based Practices

Annual immunization for influenza is recommended for all adults, especially for those 65 years of age and older, or those in other high-risk groups. Immunity sets in about two weeks after vaccination, and the flu vaccine provides protection that lasts throughout the entire flu season. Adults in New Mexico can get their flu shots from their primary care provider, at special flu clinics held across the state, or at many commercial pharmacies. Providers can learn more about evidence-based immunization strategies at the CDC's [http://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/vaccination/index.htm Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Resources for Health Professionals] webpage.

Healthy People Objective IID-12.7:

Increase the percentage of children and adults who are vaccinated annually against seasonal influenza: Noninstitutionalized adults aged 65 years and older
U.S. Target: 90 percent

Related Indicators

Health Care System Factors:


Note

**Percentages based on fewer than 50 completed surveys are not shown because they do not meet the DOH standard for data release. The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Immunization - Influenza Vaccination, Adults Age 65+

Definition: The estimated percentage of New Mexico adults age 65 and older with a current influenza immunization as reported by the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and the National Immunization Flu Survey.
Numerator: The number of survey respondents age 65 and older with a current influenza immunization. Data were weighted to adjust for effects of sample design and to represent the population distribution of adults by sex, age group, and area of residence.
Denominator: The total number of survey respondents age 65 and older, excluding missing, "Don't Know" and "Refused" responses.

Indicator Profile Report

Immunization - Influenza Vaccination, Adults Age 65+ (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

10/13/2017

Data Owner

New Mexico Immunization Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. St. Francis Drive, S-1264, Santa Fe, NM 87505. Contact: Cynthia Rawn, MPH, 505-827-0196, cynthia.rawn@state.nm.us




Immunization - Pneumonia Vaccination, Adults Age 65+: Percentage Immunized, 2012-2016

  • Dona Ana County
    69.3%
    95% Confidence Interval (66.0% - 72.4%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    70.9%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Recommended immunizations for adults aged 65 years and older include a yearly immunization against influenza (flu) and a one-time immunization against pneumococcal disease. Most of the deaths and serious illnesses caused by influenza and pneumococcal disease occur in older adults and others at increased risk for complications of these diseases because of other risk factors or medical conditions. Barriers to adult immunization include not knowing immunizations are needed, misconceptions about vaccines, and lack of recommendations from health care providers.

How Are We Doing?

In New Mexico, only one out of two Hispanics age 65 or older has ever received a pneumococcal vaccination, and only two of three Hispanics aged 65 and older received an influenza vaccination during the past year. From 2007-2009, 76% of the deaths due to pneumonia and influenza in New Mexico were to individuals age 65 or older.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Department of Health received a federal grant to address the health disparity in the Hispanic population. In order to focus the project's efforts, DPP/OHE decided to focus on Luna County in the south (predominantly of Mexican Heritage) and Rio Arriba County in the north (predominantly descendents of Spanish ancestry).

Evidence-based Practices

Immunizations are one of the most effective public health tools for preventing and eradicating disease; yet adult immunizations have not reached the coverage levels of childhood immunizations, particularly among members of minority groups. The low rates of immunization among adults is the result of many factors including: lack of access to preventive health services; the belief that adult immunizations are not necessary; and/or they lack basic knowledge about the high risks of disease and death linked to pneumonia/influenza in the elderly. Consequently, the community engagement model employed through this project recognizes that solutions must go beyond the purely medical and address influencing factors found in the local socioeconomic and cultural environment. Local Public Health offices including vaccination clinics at Senior Centers, a shot nurse and clerk were also dispatched to area homes to vaccinate senior shut-ins in their homes. These are among the most vulnerable to influenza and pneumonia.

Healthy People Objective IID-13.1:

Increase the percentage of adults who are vaccinated against pneumococcal disease: Noninstitutionalized adults aged 65 years and older
U.S. Target: 90 percent

Related Indicators

Health Care System Factors:


Note

Question wording: Have you ever had a pneumonia shot? A pneumonia shot or pneumococcal vaccine is usually given only once or twice in a persons lifetime and is different from the flu shot. Have you ever had a pneumonia shot? U.S. is median value for 50 U.S. states and D.C.  **Percentages based on fewer than 50 completed surveys are not shown because they do not meet the DOH standard for data release. The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Immunization - Pneumonia Vaccination, Adults Age 65+

Definition: The estimated percentage of New Mexico adults age 65 and older who have ever had a pneumonia immunization as reported by the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.
Numerator: The number of survey respondents age 65 and older who have ever had a pneumonia immunization . Data were weighted to adjust for effects of sample design and to represent the population distribution of adults by sex, age group, and area of residence.
Denominator: The total number of survey respondents age 65 and older, excluding missing, "Don't Know" and "Refused" responses.

Indicator Profile Report

Percentage of New Mexico Adults Age 65+ Who Have Ever Had a Pneumonia Vaccination (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/09/2017

Data Owner

New Mexico Immunization Program, New Mexico Department of Health, 1190 S. St. Francis Drive, S-1264, Santa Fe, NM 87505. Contact: Cynthia Rawn, MPH, 505-827-0196, cynthia.rawn@state.nm.us




Medicaid Enrollment: Percentage of Persons, Fiscal Year 2013

  • Dona Ana County
    18.4%
    95% Confidence Interval (18.2% - 18.6%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    14.6%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Medicaid provides health coverage for those New Mexicans living below a certain percentage of the federal poverty level, and provides coverage for almost half of New Mexico's children. People with health coverage are more likely to receive preventive medical care and are consequently less likely to suffer from preventable illnesses and complications of those illnesses.

Note

Enrollment varies from one month to the next. The average monthly enrollment was used to compute these percents.  Fiscal year Medicaid enrollment percentages were calculated using the July 1st population estimates for the same fiscal year.

Data Sources

New Mexico Human Services Department, Income Support Division, Benefit Delivery and Data Reporting Bureau, Monthly Statistical Report, www.hsd.state.nm.us/ise/reports.html.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Medicaid Enrollment

Definition: The monthly percentage of the population enrolled in Medicaid, averaged over the months in the measurement period.
Numerator: Monthly number of Medicaid cases, averaged over the months in the measurement period.
Denominator: Total population.

Indicator Profile Report

Medicaid Enrollment, Average Monthly Medicaid Eligibles as a Percentage of the Population (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/16/2013

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Cancer Screening - Mammography: Percentage with Mammography, 2012, 2014 & 2016

  • Dona Ana County
    77.1
    95% Confidence Interval (73.0 - 80.8)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    72.2
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) and is the second leading cause of cancer death in New Mexico. Regular mammograms are the best tests health providers have to screen for breast cancer.

Risk and Resiliency Factors

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, risk factors for breast cancer include: older age (>50 years); genetic mutations (e.g., BRCA1 and BRCA2); early age at menstruation (<12 years); no or late (>30 years) pregnancy; late age at menopause (>55 years); lack of physical activity; being overweight or obese after menopause; having dense breasts; using combination hormone therapy (i.e., estrogen and progestin together); taking oral contraceptives; personal or family history of breast cancer; personal history of certain non-cancerous breast diseases (e.g., atypical hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ); previous radiation therapy to chest or breasts (e.g., like for treatment of Hodgkin's lymphoma) before age 30 years; alcohol consumption. Women who took diethylstilbestrol (DES) during pregnancy and women whose mothers took DES are also at increased risk for breast cancer.

How Are We Doing?

The percent of New Mexican women who are current with breast cancer screening recommendations has remained stable for more than a decade.

What Is Being Done?

The New Mexico Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (BCCP) is dedicated to improving access to high-quality, age-appropriate breast cancer screening and diagnostic services for low-income women who are uninsured or under-insured, and helping them access resources for treatment when necessary. To do this, the BCCP supports changes within provider practices and health systems to increase screening opportunities. In addition, data and surveillance systems, such as monitoring screening quality measures, are used to develop more organized, systematic approaches to cancer screening and to improve service delivery. These approaches are supported by the New Mexico Department of Health and are being implemented by many healthcare organizations and health systems throughout New Mexico. Visit the BCCP website at: http://archive.cancernm.org/bcc/index.html

Evidence-based Practices

The BCCP supports New Mexico health care providers and health systems in using evidence-based interventions such as patient reminders, risk assessment tools, reducing structural barriers (e.g., expanding clinic hours, provision of mobile mammography events), provider reminder and recall systems, and provider assessment and feedback on performance. All of these activities have been shown to increase breast cancer screening rates, and are recommended by The Guide to Community Preventive Services, a collection of evidence-based findings of the Community Preventive Services Task Force, established by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Healthy People Objective C-17:

Increase the proportion of women who receive a breast cancer screening based on the most recent guidelines
U.S. Target: 81.1 percent

Note

The breast cancer screening questions are only administered in the BRFSS in even-numbered years. In January 2016, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) updated its previous 2009 recommendations for breast cancer screening; however, the update contained no changes in screening recommendations for average-risk women based on age group. For women ages 40-49 years, mammography screening is not routinely recommended, but women who place a higher value on the potential benefit than the potential harms may choose to begin screening every two years. For women ages 50-74 years, mammography screening is recommended every two years. For women ages 75 years and older, there was insufficient evidence to recommend for or against mammography screening.  Note: The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different. **The count or rate in certain cells of the table has been suppressed either because 1) the observed number of events is very small and not appropriate for publication, or 2) it could be used to calculate the number in a cell that has been suppressed. For survey queries, percentages calculated from fewer than 50 survey responses are suppressed. Estimates for the following counties have been suppressed due to small numbers: Catron, De Baca, Guadalupe, Harding, Hidalgo, Mora, Torrance and Union.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Cancer Screening - Mammography

Definition: Estimated percentage of New Mexican women ages 50-74 years who have had a mammogram in the past two years (i.e., current with breast cancer screening recommendations). A mammogram is an X-ray picture of the breast. Health care providers use a mammogram to look for early signs of breast cancer.
Numerator: Number of New Mexican women ages 50-74 years from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) who reported that they have had a mammogram within the past two years.
Denominator: Number of New Mexican women ages 50-74 years from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS).

Indicator Profile Report

Estimated Percentage of Women Ages 50-74 Years Who Have Had a Mammogram Within the Past Two Years (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/18/2017

Data Owner

Chronic Disease Prevention and Control Bureau, Public Health Division, New Mexico Department of Health, Public Health Division, 5301 Central Ave. NE, Suite 800, Albuquerque, NM 87108, Telephone: (505) 841-5840. For inquiries, contact the Medical Director/Epidemiologist, Susan Baum, MD, MPH (email: susan.baum@state.nm.us).




Health Care Access - Primary Care Physicians Compared to Population Size: Population per Primary Care Physician, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    1,190
    95% Confidence Interval (1,017 - 1,363)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    1,012
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

The number in the population for every primary care provider represents the number of persons a single primary care provider is required to serve. Lower numbers represent better access to primary care. The federal government uses this metric as one of the considerations for a county to be designated a "health professional shortage area," or HPSA. The threshold for the population to provider ratio is 3,500 to 1 (3,000 to 1 if there are unusually high needs in the community). In other words, it is desirable for a county to maintain a ratio under 3,500.

Healthy People Objective AHS-4:

(Developmental) Increase the number of practicing primary care providers
U.S. Target: Not applicable, see subobjectives in this category

Note

The number of primary care physicians in New Mexico's counties is annually reported in the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center's "New Mexico Health Care Workforce Committee Report." Population estimates are from UNM, GPS (see below).

Data Sources

University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Health Care Access - Primary Care Physicians Compared to Population Size

Definition: The number of persons in the population for each primary care physician.
Numerator: Number of persons in the population
Denominator: Number of primary care physicians

Indicator Profile Report

Population per Primary Care Physician, (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/22/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Oral Health - Annual Dental Visits Among Adults: Percentage Who Had a Dental Visit, 2014 & 2016 (Combined)

  • Dona Ana County
    62.0%
    95% Confidence Interval DNA
    Statistical StabilityDNA
    New Mexico
    61.7%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Oral health is essential to overall health. Good oral health improves a person's ability to speak, smile, smell, taste, touch, chew, swallow, and make facial expressions to show feelings and emotions. (1, 2) The significant improvement in the oral health of Americans over the past 50 years is a public health success story. Most of the gains are a result of effective prevention and treatment efforts. One major success is community water fluoridation, which now benefits about 7 out of 10 Americans who get water through public water systems.

Healthy People Objective OH-7:

Increase the proportion of children, adolescents, and adults who used the oral health care system in the past year
U.S. Target: 49.0 percent

Note

Survey Question: How long has it been since you last visited a dentist or a dental clinic for any reason? Include visits to dental specialists, such as orthodontists.  **Data were not available for some counties due to insufficient numbers of people (fewer than 50) from those counties who were surveyed in the BRFSS. The county-level BRFSS data used for this indicator report were weighted to be representative of the New Mexico Health Region populations. Had the data been weighted to be representative of each county population, the results would likely have been different.

Data Sources

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey Data, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, together with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury and Behavioral Epidemiology Bureau.  

Measure Description for Oral Health - Annual Dental Visits Among Adults

Definition: Percentage of adults who last visited a dentist or a dental clinic in the last 12 months. Visits may have been for any reason, including visits to dental specialists, such as orthodontists.
Numerator: Number of adults with a dental visit in the last 12 months.
Denominator: Total Number of adults in the BRFSS survey sample who answered this question.

Indicator Profile Report

Percentage of Adults Who Had a Dental Visit in the Past 12 Months (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/07/2017

Data Owner

Office of Oral Health, New Mexico Department of Health, Health Systems Bureau, 1190 St. Francis Drive Room 1054-B, P. O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87502. Contact Rudy F. Blea, Telephone: 505.827.0837, Cell: 505 795-3260, FAX: 505.827.0021, Email: rudy.blea@state.nm.us. Website: www.health.state.nm.us/PHD/OOH/.




Child Care, Licensed Provider Total Capacity, All Children, June 2017: Licensed Child Care Capacity - Number of Seats, June 2017

  • Dona Ana County
    7,598
    95% Confidence Interval DNA
    Statistical StabilityDNA
    New MexicoDNA
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Working parents frequently depend on out-of-home child care to allow them to balance their employment and family needs. Accessing child-care facilities that are located near work, home, or school can be a challenge for many parents, particularly those who rely on public transportation or live in rural areas. Quality child-care and early-education programs support a child's development and prepare them for success in school. Research shows that children who attend high-quality preschool programs are more likely to have a variety of positive social and health outcomes.

Healthy People Objective EMC-1:

(Developmental) Increase the proportion of children who are ready for school in all five domains of healthy development: physical development, social-emotional development, approaches to learning, language, and cognitive development
U.S. Target: Developmental

Data Sources

New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department, PO Drawer 5160 Santa Fe, NM 87502-5160. Phone: (505)827-8400. Website: www.cyfd.org.  

Measure Description for Child Care, Licensed Provider Total Capacity, All Children, June 2017

Definition: The June 2017 total capacity of all licensed child care facilities.
Numerator: Not Applicable
Denominator: Not Applicable

Indicator Profile Report

The Total Capacity of all Licensed Child Care Facilities (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/08/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Child Care, Licensed Provider Capacity for Infants and Toddlers, June 2017: Licensed Capacity - Number of Seats for Children Under Age 2, June 2017

  • Dona Ana County
    1,345
    95% Confidence Interval DNA
    Statistical StabilityDNA
    New MexicoDNA
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Working parents frequently depend on out-of-home child care to allow them to balance their employment and family needs. Accessing child-care facilities that are located near work, home, or school can be a challenge for many parents, particularly those who rely on public transportation or live in rural areas. In particular, infants and toddlers are at an age where they are quickly developing their sensory and coordination abilities, and accordingly they require specialized care. It is important for programs that care for infants and toddlers to implement curricula and present learning environments that are developmentally appropriate for those age classes. These requirements also mean that facilities that can care for infant- and toddler-aged children are less common, and hence, parents may find that enrollment is more difficult in these programs.

Healthy People Objective EMC-1:

(Developmental) Increase the proportion of children who are ready for school in all five domains of healthy development: physical development, social-emotional development, approaches to learning, language, and cognitive development
U.S. Target: Developmental

Data Sources

New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department, PO Drawer 5160 Santa Fe, NM 87502-5160. Phone: (505)827-8400. Website: www.cyfd.org.  

Measure Description for Child Care, Licensed Provider Capacity for Infants and Toddlers, June 2017

Definition: The June 2017 capacity of licensed child care facilities to take in children of less than 2 years of age.
Numerator: Not Applicable
Denominator: Not Applicable

Indicator Profile Report

The Capacity of Licensed Child Care Facilities to Accept Children Less Than 2 Years of Age (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/08/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Child Care, Quality Rating for Licensed Providers, June 2017: Percent Capacity 3 STAR or Higher, June 2017

  • Dona Ana County
    55.2%
    95% Confidence Interval (54.1% - 56.3%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    53.3%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Access to high quality child care directly impacts children's development and behavior. High quality child care prepares children for success in school. These positive impacts extend beyond early childhood into adolescence and include high academic achievement and fewer risk taking behaviors. Beyond behavioral health, access to quality care influences physical health through education influencing choices, access to healthful foods, and physical activity.

Healthy People Objective EMC-1:

(Developmental) Increase the proportion of children who are ready for school in all five domains of healthy development: physical development, social-emotional development, approaches to learning, language, and cognitive development
U.S. Target: Developmental

Data Sources

New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department, PO Drawer 5160 Santa Fe, NM 87502-5160. Phone: (505)827-8400. Website: www.cyfd.org.  

Measure Description for Child Care, Quality Rating for Licensed Providers, June 2017

Definition: The percentage of the total capacity of licensed providers that is high quality (3-5 STAR rated).
Numerator: The June 2017 capacity of all licensed childcare providers with 3, 4, and 5 STAR ratings.
Denominator: The June 2017 total capacity of all licensed child care facilities.

Indicator Profile Report

Percentage of the Total Licensed Child Care Capacity that is High Quality (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/08/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Child Care, Licensed Care Availability, June 2017: Ratio of Total Licensed Child Care Capacity to Number of Children Under Age 5, June 2017

  • Dona Ana County
    0.5
    95% Confidence Interval (0.49 - 0.51)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    0.44
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Working parents frequently depend on out-of-home child care to allow them to balance their employment and family needs. Accessing child-care facilities that are located near work, home, or school can be a challenge for many parents, particularly those who rely on public transportation or live in rural areas. Quality child-care and early-education programs support a child's development and prepare them for success in school. Research shows that children who attend high-quality preschool programs have a variety of positive social and health outcomes.

Healthy People Objective EMC-1:

(Developmental) Increase the proportion of children who are ready for school in all five domains of healthy development: physical development, social-emotional development, approaches to learning, language, and cognitive development
U.S. Target: Developmental

Data Sources

New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department, PO Drawer 5160 Santa Fe, NM 87502-5160. Phone: (505)827-8400. Website: www.cyfd.org.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for Child Care, Licensed Care Availability, June 2017

Definition: The ratio of the capacity of licensed child care facilities to the total number of children under age 5.
Numerator: The June 2017 total capacity of all licensed child care facilities.
Denominator: The estimated population of children under age 5 (calculated from 2016 UNM GPS population estimates).

Indicator Profile Report

The Ratio of the Total Capacity of Licensed Child Care Facilities to the Number of Children Under Age 5 (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/08/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Child Care, Working Families and Availability of Licensed Providers, June 2017: Ratio of Total Licensed Child Care Capacity to Number of Children Under 6 with Working Parents, June 2017

  • Dona Ana County
    0.62
    95% Confidence Interval (0.61 - 0.62)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    0.57
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Parents and families are characteristically the earliest educators of young children, and the level of parental interaction during formative years is linked to a variety of academic outcomes. However, the degree of parental involvement may be influenced by the labor-force participation of the parents, particularly in single-parent households. An increased need for quality child care is found in family settings where all parents are employed full-time.

Healthy People Objective EMC-1:

(Developmental) Increase the proportion of children who are ready for school in all five domains of healthy development: physical development, social-emotional development, approaches to learning, language, and cognitive development
U.S. Target: Developmental

Data Sources

New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department, PO Drawer 5160 Santa Fe, NM 87502-5160. Phone: (505)827-8400. Website: www.cyfd.org.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.   U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. http://factfinder.census.gov.  

Measure Description for Child Care, Working Families and Availability of Licensed Providers, June 2017

Definition: The ratio of the total capacity of licensed child care facilities to the number of children under age 6 for whom all parents are in the labor force.
Numerator: The June 2017 total capacity of all licensed child care facilities.
Denominator: The estimated population of children under age 6 with all parents in the labor force (calculated from 2011-2015 ACS percentages and 2013 UNM GPS population estimates).

Indicator Profile Report

The Ratio of the Total Capacity of Licensed Child Care Facilities to the Number of Children Under Age 6 for Whom All Parents are in the Labor Force (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/09/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Public Education - School Grades: Schools with A or B Grade, 2017

  • Dona Ana County
    39.7%
    95% Confidence Interval (28.5% - 51.0%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    38.0%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

The school environment directly impacts many areas of children's development, including: intellectual, physical, and social. Access to high quality education, as demonstrated through assessment, influences this development and future earning potential and economic success.

Healthy People Objective EMC-1:

(Developmental) Increase the proportion of children who are ready for school in all five domains of healthy development: physical development, social-emotional development, approaches to learning, language, and cognitive development
U.S. Target: Developmental

Note

County-level data were calculated by identifying and summarizing records from all schools located within each county, based only on those schools' physical locations (disregarding their school-district affiliation). The compiled county data therefore may not accurately reflect the schools' students' actual county(ies) of residence.

Measure Description for Public Education - School Grades

Definition: The percentage of schools with an A or B grade.
Numerator: Number of schools with an A or B grade.
Denominator: Number of schools.

Indicator Profile Report

The Percentage of Schools with an A or B Grade (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/22/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




New Mexico Population - Poverty Among Children Under Age 18: Percentage of Children Age 0-17 in Poverty, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    38.8%
    95% Confidence Interval (33.9% - 43.7%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    27.2%
    U.S.
    20.7%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Poverty in the early years of a child's life, more than at any other time, has especially harmful effects on continuing healthy development and well-being, including developmental delays and infant mortality. Well-being in later childhood, such as teen pregnancy, substance abuse, and educational attainment, are also influenced by early childhood poverty. Children born into poverty are less likely to have regular health care, proper nutrition, and opportunities for mental stimulation and enrichment.

How Are We Doing?

The percentage of children in poverty peaked in New Mexico in 2013 at 30.1%. The percentage has declined in the last two years and now stands at 27.2%, still over 30% higher than the U.S. rate of 20.7%.

Healthy People Objective SDOH-3.2:

Proportion of children aged 0-17 years living in poverty
U.S. Target: Not applicable

Note

NM county population values derive from UNM GPS population estimates. Percentages in poverty derive from U.S. Census SAIPE. 95% confidence intervals were calculated from the SAIPE 90% confidence intervals. Statewide totals and percentages will differ between estimates made using U.S. Census SAIPE and ACS values, due to rounding differences and dissimilar methodologies.

Data Sources

U.S. Census Bureau, Data Integration Division, Small Area Estimates Branch, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE). http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for New Mexico Population - Poverty Among Children Under Age 18

Definition: The estimated number and percentage of children under age 18 living in households with income below the federal poverty level.
Numerator: Estimated number of children age 17 and under living in households whose income is below 100% of the federal poverty level as defined by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Poverty status is determined by comparing household income to poverty thresholds (income cutoffs). Thresholds vary by family size and number of children under 18 in the household, and are updated in January of each year. For instance, the poverty level for a family of four in 2015 was $24,250. The U.S. Poverty Guidelines may be found at the [http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/ Health and Human Services website].
Denominator: The estimated number of children age 17 and under in the population.

Indicator Profile Report

Children Under Age 18 Living in Poverty (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/03/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




New Mexico Population - Poverty Among Children Under Age 5: Percentage of Children Under Age 5 in Poverty, 2011-2015

  • Dona Ana County
    45.1%
    95% Confidence Interval (40.2% - 50.0%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    33.9%
    U.S.
    22.8%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Childhood poverty has especially harmful effects on healthy development and well-being, including developmental delays and infant mortality. Children born into poverty are less likely to have regular health care, proper nutrition, and opportunities for mental stimulation and enrichment. These factors are especially important in the very earliest years of life, because childrens' brain growth and skill development starts at early infancy. Studies document that children who live in low-income and under-educated families start to score lower on standardized developmental tests by as early as eighteen months of age. Such early setbacks are difficult to overcome. Due to their size, physiology, and behavior, young children are also disproportionately vulnerable to many health hazards. For example, the risk factors for childhood lead poisoning include living in a family with a poverty-level income. Studies have documented low blood-lead testing rates among children living in households with this risk factor. This measure identifies counties with higher percentages of children who therefore may be at increased risk for lead poisoning. When compared with lead-testing rates by county, populations with inadequate lead testing of young at-risk children may be identified in order to improve testing in these regions.

How Are We Doing?

New Mexico is one of the most impoverished states in the nation, ranking near the bottom of all states in the percent of its young children living in poverty (49th in both the 2013 and 2014 Annie E. Casey Foundation's KIDS COUNT Data Books).

Healthy People Objective EMC-1:

(Developmental) Increase the proportion of children who are ready for school in all five domains of healthy development: physical development, social-emotional development, approaches to learning, language, and cognitive development
U.S. Target: Developmental

Note

The small-area percentages in poverty derive from the American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates. 95% confidence intervals were calculated from the ACS 90% confidence intervals. The small-area and statewide population denominators derive from from the UNM GPS population estimates (using the mid-point year population estimates). The statewide and national percentages and the national population estimates derive from SAIPE estimates. Statewide totals and percentages will differ between estimates made using U.S. Census SAIPE and ACS values, due to rounding differences and dissimilar methodologies.

Data Sources

U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. http://factfinder.census.gov.   U.S. Census Bureau, Data Integration Division, Small Area Estimates Branch, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE). http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for New Mexico Population - Poverty Among Children Under Age 5

Definition: The estimated number and percentage of children under age 5 living in households with income below the federal poverty level.
Numerator: Estimated number of children age 4 and under living in households whose income is below 100% of the federal poverty level as defined by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Poverty status is determined by comparing household income to poverty thresholds (income cutoffs). Thresholds vary by family size and number of children under 18 in the household, and are updated in January of each year. For instance, the poverty level for a family of four in 2015 was $24,250. The U.S. Poverty Guidelines may be found at the [http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/ Health and Human Services website].
Denominator: The estimated number of children age 4 and under in the population.

Indicator Profile Report

Percentage of Children Under Age 5 Living in Poverty (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/25/2017

Data Owner

New Mexico Healthy Homes and Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, Environmental Health Epidemiology Bureau, Environmental Public Health Tracking Program, New Mexico Department Health, 1190 St. Francis Drive, Suite 1320, Santa Fe, NM 87505, Heidi Krapfl, Chief, (505)476-3577 heidi.krapfl@state.nm.us. Toll free: 1-888-878-8992




New Mexico Population - Poverty Among Children Age 5-17: Percentage of Children Age 5-17 in Poverty, 2015

  • Dona Ana County
    36.7%
    95% Confidence Interval (31.4% - 42.0%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    25.6%
    U.S.
    19.5%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Research suggests that living in poverty during early childhood is associated with lower than average academic performance that begins in kindergarten(1) and extends through elementary and high school. Living in poverty during early childhood is associated with lower than average rates of school completion.(2)

How Are We Doing?

In 2015, an estimated 91,400 New Mexico school-aged children, 5 to 17 years old, were in families living in poverty.

Note

NOTE: The measure of child poverty includes all children who are related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption (except a child who is the spouse of the householder). The householder is the person (or one of the people) who owns or rents (maintains) the housing unit. 

Data Sources

U.S. Census Bureau, Data Integration Division, Small Area Estimates Branch, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE). http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/  

Measure Description for New Mexico Population - Poverty Among Children Age 5-17

Definition: The estimated percentage of children under age 5-17 living in households whose income is at or below the federal poverty level.
Numerator: Estimated number of children under age 5-17 living in households whose income is at or below the federal poverty level.
Denominator: The estimated number of children under age 5-17 in the population.

Indicator Profile Report

Children Age 5-17 Living in Poverty (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/03/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




New Mexico Population - Race/Ethnicity: Percentage of the Total Population, 2016

  • Dona Ana County
    71.2%
    95% Confidence Interval (71.0% - 71.4%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    61.0%
    U.S.DNA
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

New Mexico's population is very diverse, which sometimes leads to barriers to obtaining culturally-sensitive health care. Because of this and other social factors, there are real disparities in the health of New Mexicans of various race/ethnic groups. Reducing racial- and ethnically-based health disparities is an overarching goal of the U.S. Public Health Services/ Healthy People 2020 initiative.

What Is Being Done?

With our partners (the Governor, legislators, local and tribal governments, public and private organizations, health care providers, health care institutions and concerned New Mexicans), the New Mexico Department of Health is working to prevent disease, promote health, improve access to information and care, deliver appropriate care and develop strategies to reduce disparities where they exist.

Data Sources

Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for New Mexico Population - Race/Ethnicity

Definition: The percentage of the population by race/ethnicity categories.
Numerator: Estimated number of persons in each race/ethnic category.
Denominator: The total number of persons in the population.

Indicator Profile Report

Percentage Non-White (American Indian + Asian + Black + Hispanic) (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

09/27/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Public Education - High School Graduation Rate: Graduation Rate, 2015-2016 Four Year Cohort

  • Dona Ana County
    80.0%
    95% Confidence Interval DNA
    Statistical StabilityDNA
    New Mexico
    71.0%
    U.S.
    83.0%
    DNA=Data not available.
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Education level is strongly related to health status for a variety of reasons. Education is associated with better earning potential and higher income which enables purchase of better housing in safer neighborhoods, healthier food, health insurance coverage and more timely medical care. Persons who have clear goals and a sense of control over their own lives tend to have both a higher education level and better health (Lachman & Weaner, 1998). Short-term health problems associated with not graduating from high school include substance use, pregnancy, and psychological, emotional, and behavioral problems. For adolescent females, teenage pregnancy is the leading reason for not graduating; an estimated 30% - 40% of female teenaged dropouts are mothers. Early parenting also affects young males who leave school to support a child. Mental illness and emotional disturbance also account for a significant proportion of students who don't graduate (Freudenberg & Ruglis, 2007).

Healthy People Objective AH-5.1:

Increase the proportion of students who graduate with a regular diploma 4 years after starting 9th grade
U.S. Target: 82.4 percent

Note

These rates are calculated for students who graduated 4 years after entering high school as freshmen, called "4-year cohort". All students entering New Mexico public high schools, in any grade, become members of an on-time cohort. Graduates are students who graduate with a standard diploma. Students who get a GED or a Certificate of Completion are considered "non-graduates" in this computation of the graduation rate. All schools with any grade 9, 10, 11, or 12 receive a rate.  ** = data not reported. Due to the New Mexico Public Education Department's Shared Accountability model, we are unable to publish numerators and denominators for these estimates. For more information on these methods, see the Graduation Technical Manual at: [http://ped.state.nm.us/Graduation/2013/Grad%20Technical%20Manual%20V3.0.pdf].

Data Sources

New Mexico Public Education Department, Jerry Apodaca Education Building, 300 Don Gaspar, Santa Fe NM 87501. Phone: (505)827-5800. Website: www.ped.state.nm.us.  

Measure Description for Public Education - High School Graduation Rate

Definition: The rate of students who began high school as a 9th grader and who then proceeded to graduate from high school 4 years later. In the case of transfers between school districts, a student's outcome was proportionally distributed among all school districts contributing to that student's outcome. The New Mexico Public Education Department calls this the Shared Accountability model.
Numerator: The number of students that graduated from high school on time in a given year. This number is the total of all students and student fractions (in the case of transfers) for high school graduates, aggregated for each school district.
Denominator: The total number of students. This number is a count of all students enrolled for any period of time during the 4 year period ending in the year shown.

Indicator Profile Report

New Mexico High School Graduation Rates (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/24/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




New Mexico Population Demographics - Education, No High School Diploma: Percentage of Adults Age 25+ with No H.S. Diploma, 2011-2015

  • Dona Ana County
    21.7%
    95% Confidence Interval (20.6% - 22.8%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    15.4%
    U.S.
    12.9%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

A good education leads to good health in several ways. First, the more schooling people have, the more money they earn which enables them to purchase better housing in safer neighborhoods, healthier food, better medical care and health insurance, and more education. Each of these factors is associated with improved health. Each one allows individuals to move up the occupational and income ladder, giving them more prestige and power, both of which are associated with better health. High school completion is also the gateway into college, which offers even greater benefits than high school alone. Second, education facilitates healthier behavior choices by offering learners access to health information and tools to acquire help and resources, such as smoking cessation programs. Third, education helps people to acquire social support, strengthen social networks, and mitigate social stressors. The more education people have the more social support they have. Education helps people to gain a sense of control over their lives, an outcome associated with better health.

Evidence-based Practices

Children who participate in high-quality preschool programs are more likely to complete high school.

Data Sources

Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.   U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. http://factfinder.census.gov.  

Measure Description for New Mexico Population Demographics - Education, No High School Diploma

Definition: The percentage of adults age 25 years and older with no high school diploma (including equivalency).
Numerator: Estimated population age 25 years and older with no high school diploma (including equivalency) or higher degree.
Denominator: Total population age 25 years and older.

Indicator Profile Report

The Percentage of Adults Age 25 or Over With No High School Diploma (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

01/05/2016

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




New Mexico Population Demographics - Education, Bachelor's Degree or Higher: Percentage of Adults Age 25+ with Bachelor's Degree or Higher, 2011-2015

  • Dona Ana County
    27.4%
    95% Confidence Interval (26.1% - 28.8%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    26.1%
    U.S.
    18.7%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Higher adult education levels are associated with greater earning potential, higher life expectancy, and increased social involvement. There is a relationship between more education and better mental well-being and over-all health. People having higher education benefits society as a whole through: civic engagement, interest in societal issues, and stronger interpersonal connections.

Note

American Community Survey population estimates are the calculated number of people living in an area as of a specified point in time, usually July 1st. The estimated population is calculated using a component of change model that incorporates information on natural increase (births, deaths) and net migration (net domestic migration, net international migration) that has occurred in an area since the latest decennial census. 

Data Sources

U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. http://factfinder.census.gov.   Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for New Mexico Population Demographics - Education, Bachelor's Degree or Higher

Definition: The percentage of adults age 25 years and older who have a bachelor's degree or higher.
Numerator: Estimated population age 25 years and older with a bachelor's degree or higher.
Denominator: Estimated population aged 25 or more years.

Indicator Profile Report

The Percentage of Adults Age 25 or Over Who Have a Bachelor's Degree or Higher (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

01/03/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




Unemployment Rate: Percentage Unemployed, 2016

  • Dona Ana County
    7.2%
    95% Confidence Interval (7.0% - 7.4%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    6.7%
    U.S.
    4.9%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

Household income is strongly related to health status for all persons in the household. Those living at or near the poverty level tend to have poorer health status, in part because they cannot always afford health care. Health status also depends on meeting a family's needs for adequate housing and nutrition. Lack of income may also keep children from having access to quality education, safe areas to play, and expose them to other risk factors. In addition, common reasons for unemployment include chronic mental or physical illness that limits a person's ability to work outside the home.

How Are We Doing?

Over the last decade, the New Mexico unemployment rate peaked at 8.1% in 2010 and has been improving annually since then. The 2016 rate of 6.7% is near what is considered the "full employment" level (4% to 6.4%). The lowest unemployment rate New Mexico has experienced in the last decade was 3.5% in 2007, just before the recession. Unemployment is most severe in Luna County which had a rate of 14.7% in 2016.

Data Sources

New Mexico Department of Workforce Solutions, 401 Broadway NE, Albuquerque NM 87102. Phone: (505)841-8645. Website: www.dws.state.nm.us.  

Measure Description for Unemployment Rate

Definition: The percentage of the civilian labor force that was not employed and seeking employment. See Data Interpretation Issues for more information about the definition of employed versus unemployed persons.
Numerator: The number of unemployed persons in the civilian labor force.
Denominator: The total of persons in the civilian labor force, the sum of employed and unemployed persons.

Indicator Profile Report

Percentage Unemployed (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

07/19/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274




New Mexico Population - Age 65+: Percentage Age 65+, 2016

  • Dona Ana County
    15.2%
    95% Confidence Interval (15.1% - 15.4%)
    Statistical StabilityStable
    New Mexico
    16.5%
    U.S.
    15.2%
  • Dona Ana County Compared to State

    gauge ranking
    Description of Dashboard Gauge

    Description of the Dashboard Gauge

    This "dashboard" type graphic is based on the community data on the right. It compares the community value on this indicator to the state overall value.
    • Excellent = The community's value on this indicator is BETTER than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.
    • Watch = The community's value is BETTER than state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Improvement Needed = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, but the difference IS NOT statistically significant.
    • Reason for Concern = The community's value on this indicator is WORSE than the state value, and the difference IS statistically significant.

    The community value is considered statistically significantly different from the state value if the state value is outside the range of the community's 95% confidence interval. If the community's data or 95% confidence interval information is not available, a blank gauge image will be displayed with the message, "missing information."
    NOTE: The labels used on the gauge graphic are meant to describe the community's status in plain language. The placement of the gauge needle is based solely on the statistical difference between the community and state values. When selecting priority health issues to work on, a community should take into account additional factors such as how much improvement could be made, the U.S. value, the statistical stability of the community number, the severity of the health condition, and whether the difference is clinically significant.

Why Is This Important?

The age distribution of a population is related to several health measures, such as the prevalence of chronic disease and the demand for family planning and immunization services. Younger populations, that is, those with a higher percentage of children and young adults, have different needs for health services than those with older populations. Without increases to the health, long-term care, and support systems for older populations in New Mexico, this dramatic shift in New Mexico's demographics may endanger the health of our older adults and especially those older adults living in rural communities.

Data Sources

Population Estimates: University of New Mexico, Geospatial and Population Studies (GPS) Program, http://gps.unm.edu/.  

Measure Description for New Mexico Population - Age 65+

Definition: The percentage of the population that is older adults.
Numerator: Number of older adults (age 65 and over) in the population.
Denominator: Total number of persons in the population.

Indicator Profile Report

Percentage of the Population Age 65 and Over (exits this report)

Date Content Last Updated

08/02/2017

Data Owner

Community Health Assessment Program, New Mexico Department of Health, Epidemiology and Response Division, 1190 S. Saint Francis Drive, P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM, 87502. Contact Lois Haggard at lois.haggard@state.nm.us or by telephone at (505) 827-5274

The information provided above is from the New Mexico Department of Health's NM-IBIS web site (http://ibis.health.state.nm.us). The information published on this website may be reproduced without permission. Please use the following citation: "Retrieved Thu, 19 October 2017 from New Mexico Department of Health, Indicator-Based Information System for Public Health Web site: http://ibis.health.state.nm.us".

Content updated: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 16:54:15 MDT