Statistics and South Carolina’s Status and Position  

On a daily basis the citizens of South Carolina are exposed to various statistics that claim to indicate how the state is performing on some aspect of life.  More often than not these statistics indicate that the state is performing poorly in comparison with the rest of the nation.  Indeed these numbers are generally presented as a criticism of government performance.  The source of these statistics is not always clear.  And like any statistic, the numbers are subject to interpretation and misinterpretation. And because the numbers are used in a political context, the statistics and the interpretations are very often in conflict.  

So how is South Carolina really performing on key policy areas? How can the state’s policy makers and citizens gauge progress over time? What measures should be used? The South Carolina Indicators (SCI) Project  provides citizens and policy makers with valid, reliable and comparable statistical indicators of how South Carolina is performing in five key policy areas: education, the economy, public safety, public health and social welfare, and transportation and infrastructure.

The SCI Project Website 

To navigate the SCI Project web site, simply choose the topic or policy area of interest below or on the adjacent navigation bar.    

For each policy area (education, the economy, etc.), you will find relevant indicators presented in summary form within a table format on the “At-a-Glance” page. Most data on this site are comparable to other states and historical data are available.  Select state rankings are also provided. Where references are made comparing South Carolina (SC) to the southeast (SE), it should be noted that the southeastern states include Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee.  

Additionally, the data sources are indicated via hyperlink for each indicator where possible. In other cases, sources are simply referenced. Further, in some cases, a brief narrative or discussion provides some analysis for each indicator. In selected instances, more in-depth discussion is quoted from various sources.  Suggested readings may be additionally provided to explain the technical definitions, use, limitations, etc. of the data. Finally, endnotes are included—as appropriate—for citation or explanatory purposes.

We welcome comments and suggestions from government officials, legislators, and the general public. To make suggestions, recommend additional indicators, or to report problems or broken links, please direct your comments to scip@mailbox.sc.edu.