E.g., 04/22/2017
E.g., 04/22/2017

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Profile: Maryland


Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Profile: Maryland

TotalImmediately Eligible (ages 15 and over)Eligible but for Education (ages 15 and over)Eligible in the Future (under age 15)
Total (number)33,00020,0006,0007,000
Top Countries of Birth (%)
El Salvador21163425
Regions of Birth (%)
Mexico and Central America55449251
South America810-8
Age (%)
Under 9----
9 to 1210--47
13 to 147--34
15 to 1717272-
18 to 21323846-
22 to 26222344-
27 to 30----
Gender (% female)43453246
Educational Attainment and School Enrollment (%)
Less than 9th grade3053597
9-12th grades3129653
High school diploma, not enrolled in college1830--
High school diploma, enrolled in college1423--
Associate's degree----
Bachelor's degree or higher----
English Proficiency (%)
Limited English proficient27206114
Top Languages Spoken at Home (%)
Population ages 16 and older25,00019,0006,000-
Employed (%)554874-
Income as Share of Federal Poverty Level (%)
Below 100% of the poverty level18152322
100% to 199% of the poverty level30254534
At or above 200% of the poverty level51603344

Notes: MPI estimates of the DACA-eligible population include unauthorized immigrant youth who had been in the United States for at least five years, were under the age of 16 at the time of their arrival, and were under the age of 31 at the time of the American Community Survey (2009 through 2013 depending on the survey year). Immediately eligible youth met both age and educational criteria (i.e., they were ages 15 to 30 and were either enrolled in school or had at least a high school diploma or its equivalent at the time of the survey). Youth eligible but for education were those ages 15 to 30 who did not have a high school diploma or equivalent and were not enrolled in school at the time of the survey. Children eligible in the future met the age-at-arrival requirements but were not yet 15 years old at the time of the survey, and will age into eligibility provided they stay in school. Eligibility due to adult education enrollment and ineligibility due to criminal history or lack of continuous U.S. presence were not modeled due to lack of data. 

For languages, "Chinese" includes Mandarin, Cantonese, and other Chinese languages; “English” includes English, Jamaican Creole, Krio, and Pidgin Krio; "French" includes French, Patois, French or Haitian Creole, and Cajun; “Hindi and related” includes Hindi, Urdu, Bengali, Punjabi, Marathi, Gujarati, Sindhi, Sinhalese, and Kannada; “Sub-Saharan African” includes Bantu, Swahili, Mande, Fulani, Kru, and other African languages; “Tagalog/Other Filipino” includes Tagalog, Bisayan, Sebuano, Llocano, and Hocano.

Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

“-” estimates are zero, not applicable, or not displayed due to small sample size.

Source: Migration Policy Institute (MPI) analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data from the 2013 American Community Survey (ACS), 2009-2013 ACS pooled, and the 2008 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) by James Bachmeier and Colin Hammar of Temple University and Jennifer Van Hook of The Pennsylvania State University, Population Research Institute.   

Methodology in Brief: In the SIPP, noncitizens report whether they currently have lawful permanent resident (LPR) status—i.e., a green card. Those without LPR status may be recent refugees, temporary visitors (e.g., students or high-skilled H-1B workers), Temporary Protected Status (TPS) beneficiaries, or unauthorized immigrants. MPI’s method maps characteristics such as country of birth, year of U.S. entry, age, gender, and educational attainment between the ACS and SIPP surveys, and those noncitizens in the ACS who have characteristics similar to those reporting LPR status in the SIPP are coded as LPRs in the ACS. The remaining noncitizens—who are similar in characteristics to those not reporting LPR status in the SIPP—are classified as either unauthorized or legal temporary migrants, depending on whether they meet the qualifications for H-1B, TPS, and the other temporary classifications. This methodology was developed by Jennifer Van Hook of The Pennsylvania State University and James Bachmeier of Temple University. For more detail, see Jeanne Batalova, Sarah Hooker, Randy Capps, and James D. Bachmeier, DACA at the Two-Year Mark: A National and State Profile of Youth Eligible and Applying for Deferred Action (Washington, DC: MPI, 2014). Please note that these estimates use commonly accepted benchmarks from other research studies to determine the size of the unauthorized population and response rates to surveys. These estimates have the same sampling and coverage errors as any other survey-based estimates that rely on ACS and other Census Bureau data.