Counties where children have the best opportunity for economic mobility in Kentucky

Americans have long understood that their birthplace can significantly affect their futures, and academics have increasingly been able to connect tangible early life factors like where they live and the friendships they’ve cultivated with potential future income.

Among the most recent studies shedding light on what’s known as economic mobility—a person’s ability to move themselves and their families up the socioeconomic ladder over their lifetime—are a series of papers authored by Harvard University researchers leveraging vast troves of social networking data.

As part of a national analysis, Wealth Enhancement Group used data from Harvard University‘s Social Capital Atlas project to identify where in Kentucky children have the best (and worst) chances at upward economic mobility.

The research draws on a privacy-protected dataset representing 21 billion friendships from Facebook made public through its parent company Meta’s Data for Good project. It also uses anonymous tax records, according to the authors. The scholars assigned a score to locales according to how economically connected low- and high-income people living in the area have historically been over at least a decade, per that data. The dataset does not include scores for about 180 of the 3,000 or so counties in the U.S.

The research attempts to fill in the gaps of previous efforts to study American economic mobility that did not consider a person’s vast social networks nor their importance in creating better lives for themselves and their children.

It turns out the ability to cultivate friendships linking people of different socioeconomic backgrounds with one another is the strongest factor in determining whether a child can surpass the earning potential of their parents, Harvard researchers found. They call this economic connectedness.

Read on to find out where economic connectedness is strongest in your state.

Canva

#50. Garrard County

– Economic connectedness: 0.86

– Median Income: $58,137

– Population: 17,018

— 93.5% white

— 2.4% Black

— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0% Asian

ScottymanPhoto // Shutterstock

#49. Rowan County

– Economic connectedness: 0.87

– Median Income: $45,681

– Population: 24,654

— 95.6% white

— 1.9% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.8% Asian

Canva

#48. Muhlenberg County

– Economic connectedness: 0.87

– Median Income: $46,124

– Population: 31,011

— 92.3% white

— 4.5% Black

— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.3% Asian

Canva

#47. Logan County

– Economic connectedness: 0.87

– Median Income: $53,133

– Population: 27,319

— 90% white

— 6.2% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.4% Asian

Canva

#46. Owen County

– Economic connectedness: 0.87

– Median Income: $52,450

– Population: 11,160

— 95% white

— 0.5% Black

— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0% Asian

Canva

#45. Trigg County

– Economic connectedness: 0.87

– Median Income: $53,693

– Population: 14,067

— 89.2% white

— 7.2% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.3% Asian

Canva

#44. Marion County

– Economic connectedness: 0.87

– Median Income: $48,791

– Population: 19,556

— 89.3% white

— 6.9% Black

— 0.3% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.7% Asian

Canva

#43. Nicholas County

– Economic connectedness: 0.87

– Median Income: $44,306

– Population: 7,517

— 95.9% white

— 1.2% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0% Asian

Patrick Jennings // Shutterstock

#42. Boyle County

– Economic connectedness: 0.87

– Median Income: $54,234

– Population: 30,469

— 85.9% white

— 7.8% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.8% Asian

Canva

#41. Graves County

– Economic connectedness: 0.88

– Median Income: $48,187

– Population: 36,796

— 88.5% white

— 4.1% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.4% Asian

Anne Kitzman // Shutterstock

#40. Grant County

– Economic connectedness: 0.88

– Median Income: $60,040

– Population: 24,918

— 93.7% white

— 0.1% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.1% Asian

Real Window Creative // Shutterstock

#39. Franklin County

– Economic connectedness: 0.88

– Median Income: $59,498

– Population: 51,319

— 82% white

— 9.5% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 1.8% Asian

Marked Imagery // Shutterstock

#38. Greenup County

– Economic connectedness: 0.88

– Median Income: $55,431

– Population: 35,996

— 96% white

— 0.9% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.6% Asian

Canva

#37. Daviess County

– Economic connectedness: 0.88

– Median Income: $57,660

– Population: 102,488

— 88.4% white

— 4.7% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 2% Asian

Canva

#36. Shelby County

– Economic connectedness: 0.88

– Median Income: $73,974

– Population: 47,523

— 83.1% white

— 6.4% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 1.1% Asian

Canva

#35. Mason County

– Economic connectedness: 0.89

– Median Income: $48,106

– Population: 17,103

— 88.4% white

— 6.2% Black

— 0.7% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.9% Asian

Canva

#34. McCracken County

– Economic connectedness: 0.89

– Median Income: $53,366

– Population: 67,394

— 84% white

— 10.4% Black

— 0.3% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 1% Asian

Canva

#33. Madison County

– Economic connectedness: 0.89

– Median Income: $55,002

– Population: 92,194

— 90.6% white

— 4.1% Black

— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.9% Asian

Neal Bryant // Shutterstock

#32. Crittenden County

– Economic connectedness: 0.89

– Median Income: $45,000

– Population: 8,997

— 95.9% white

— 0.7% Black

— 0.6% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.3% Asian

Canva

#31. McLean County

– Economic connectedness: 0.89

– Median Income: $57,027

– Population: 9,182

— 96.7% white

— 1.3% Black

— 0.4% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.2% Asian

Canva

#30. Jessamine County

– Economic connectedness: 0.89

– Median Income: $65,196

– Population: 53,016

— 89.7% white

— 4.4% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 1.5% Asian

Michele Korfhage // Shutterstock

#29. Grayson County

– Economic connectedness: 0.89

– Median Income: $40,839

– Population: 26,351

— 96.2% white

— 0.3% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.3% Asian

Canva

#28. Hardin County

– Economic connectedness: 0.89

– Median Income: $59,863

– Population: 110,134

— 78.1% white

— 11.8% Black

— 0.3% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 1.9% Asian

Patrick Jennings // Shutterstock

#27. Fleming County

– Economic connectedness: 0.9

– Median Income: $48,315

– Population: 14,996

— 95.5% white

— 1.5% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.3% Asian

Canva

#26. Livingston County

– Economic connectedness: 0.9

– Median Income: $51,081

– Population: 8,989

— 96.6% white

— 0.7% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.4% Asian

Wangkun Jia // Shutterstock

#25. Edmonson County

– Economic connectedness: 0.91

– Median Income: $41,533

– Population: 12,165

— 94.9% white

— 1.6% Black

— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0% Asian

Canva

#24. Ballard County

– Economic connectedness: 0.91

– Median Income: $52,695

– Population: 7,814

— 92.7% white

— 3.9% Black

— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.3% Asian

Canva

#23. Caldwell County

– Economic connectedness: 0.92

– Median Income: $48,280

– Population: 12,641

— 91.9% white

— 6.5% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0% Asian

Patrick Jennings // Shutterstock

#22. Harrison County

– Economic connectedness: 0.92

– Median Income: $53,862

– Population: 18,690

— 94.7% white

— 1.5% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0% Asian

Patrick Jennings // Shutterstock

#21. Mercer County

– Economic connectedness: 0.92

– Median Income: $53,750

– Population: 22,470

— 92.5% white

— 3.8% Black

— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.8% Asian

Canva

#20. Pendleton County

– Economic connectedness: 0.92

– Median Income: $57,619

– Population: 14,625

— 95% white

— 0.7% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.5% Asian

Canva

#19. Robertson County

– Economic connectedness: 0.92

– Median Income: $53,833

– Population: 2,196

— 98.8% white

— 0.3% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0% Asian

woodsnorthphoto // Shutterstock

#18. Meade County

– Economic connectedness: 0.93

– Median Income: $63,944

– Population: 29,735

— 91% white

— 3.8% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.8% Asian

Canva

#17. Breckinridge County

– Economic connectedness: 0.93

– Median Income: $49,919

– Population: 20,345

— 95.1% white

— 2% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0% Asian

Canva

#16. Henry County

– Economic connectedness: 0.93

– Median Income: $52,301

– Population: 15,691

— 92% white

— 2.7% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.4% Asian

Canva

#15. Bullitt County

– Economic connectedness: 0.93

– Median Income: $67,892

– Population: 81,729

— 94% white

— 1.1% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.7% Asian

Canva

#14. LaRue County

– Economic connectedness: 0.94

– Median Income: $53,555

– Population: 14,768

— 93.2% white

— 3.4% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.3% Asian

Canva

#13. Boone County

– Economic connectedness: 0.94

– Median Income: $87,034

– Population: 134,599

— 88.4% white

— 3.7% Black

— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 2.3% Asian

Ivelin Denev // Shutterstock

#12. Woodford County

– Economic connectedness: 0.94

– Median Income: $72,765

– Population: 26,758

— 90.9% white

— 4% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.4% Asian

Canva

#11. Carlisle County

– Economic connectedness: 0.95

– Median Income: $42,386

– Population: 4,821

— 94.9% white

— 0.8% Black

— 0.5% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.6% Asian

Canva

#10. Calloway County

– Economic connectedness: 0.97

– Median Income: $44,534

– Population: 37,291

— 90.7% white

— 3.5% Black

— 0.3% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 1.6% Asian

Canva

#9. Lyon County

– Economic connectedness: 0.97

– Median Income: $55,203

– Population: 8,700

— 91.7% white

— 5% Black

— 0.6% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.5% Asian

Canva

#8. Hancock County

– Economic connectedness: 0.97

– Median Income: $61,622

– Population: 9,050

— 95.5% white

— 1.4% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.3% Asian

Patrick Jennings // Shutterstock

#7. Bracken County

– Economic connectedness: 0.98

– Median Income: $63,277

– Population: 8,394

— 96.3% white

— 2.1% Black

— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.4% Asian

Canva

#6. Campbell County

– Economic connectedness: 0.98

– Median Income: $65,580

– Population: 93,023

— 92.9% white

— 2.6% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 1% Asian

Canva

#5. Anderson County

– Economic connectedness: 0.98

– Median Income: $59,887

– Population: 23,646

— 94.3% white

— 2.4% Black

— 0% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.4% Asian

Canva

#4. Marshall County

– Economic connectedness: 0.99

– Median Income: $58,989

– Population: 31,662

— 96.6% white

— 0.9% Black

— 0.5% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.1% Asian

Ryan_hoel // Shutterstock

#3. Nelson County

– Economic connectedness: 1.

– Median Income: $64,354

– Population: 46,440

— 91.6% white

— 5.1% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.5% Asian

Michele Korfhage // Shutterstock

#2. Spencer County

– Economic connectedness: 1.02

– Median Income: $92,973

– Population: 19,256

— 95.6% white

— 1.7% Black

— 0.1% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 0.4% Asian

Stephen Bailey // Shutterstock

#1. Oldham County

– Economic connectedness: 1.07

– Median Income: $109,815

– Population: 67,586

— 89.5% white

— 3.8% Black

— 0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native

— 1.7% Asian

This story features data reporting and writing by Dom DiFurio and is part of a series utilizing data automation across 50 states.

This story originally appeared on Wealth Enhancement Group and was produced and
distributed in partnership with Stacker Studio.