Chickasaw vs Samoan Community Comparison
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Samoan
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Chickasaw
Samoans
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
4,237
SOCIAL INDEX
39.9/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
202nd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Samoan Integration in Chickasaw Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 105,560,757 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Samoans within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.269. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.012% in Samoans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to a decrease of 12.2 Samoans.
Chickasaw vs Samoan Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $101,580, a difference of 23.6%), median household income ($70,005 compared to $86,498, a difference of 23.6%), and householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $54,610, a difference of 22.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 26.0%, a difference of 4.6%), median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $51,389, a difference of 7.4%), and median earnings ($40,672 compared to $44,206, a difference of 8.7%).
Income Metric | Chickasaw | Samoan |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $36,475 | Tragic $39,826 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $85,356 | Fair $100,344 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $70,005 | Good $86,498 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $40,672 | Tragic $44,206 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $47,832 | Tragic $51,389 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $34,414 | Tragic $37,498 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Tragic $44,763 | Exceptional $54,610 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $77,929 | Fair $92,385 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $82,193 | Good $101,580 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $53,732 | Exceptional $65,427 |
Wage/Income Gap | Tragic 27.2% | Fair 26.0% |
Chickasaw vs Samoan Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in single male poverty (16.3% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 40.0%), single father poverty (19.0% compared to 13.8%, a difference of 37.3%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (24.5% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 34.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 11.1%, a difference of 4.6%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 6.9%), and receiving food stamps (13.1% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 8.5%).
Poverty Metric | Chickasaw | Samoan |
Poverty | Tragic 14.7% | Good 12.0% |
Families | Tragic 10.8% | Good 8.6% |
Males | Tragic 13.5% | Good 10.9% |
Females | Tragic 15.9% | Good 13.1% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 24.5% | Exceptional 18.2% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 17.0% | Average 13.5% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 21.8% | Excellent 16.5% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 19.5% | Good 15.6% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 19.8% | Excellent 15.7% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 19.6% | Excellent 15.7% |
Single Males | Tragic 16.3% | Exceptional 11.7% |
Single Females | Tragic 26.3% | Good 20.6% |
Single Fathers | Tragic 19.0% | Exceptional 13.8% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 34.4% | Excellent 28.5% |
Married Couples | Tragic 5.8% | Exceptional 4.9% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Good 10.7% | Exceptional 10.0% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Exceptional 11.6% | Exceptional 11.1% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 13.1% | Fair 12.1% |
Chickasaw vs Samoan Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 23.5%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 19.7%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (4.7% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 16.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 0.76%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 1.1%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.9% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 2.0%).
Unemployment Metric | Chickasaw | Samoan |
Unemployment | Exceptional 5.0% | Tragic 5.5% |
Males | Excellent 5.2% | Tragic 5.5% |
Females | Excellent 5.1% | Poor 5.4% |
Youth < 25 | Exceptional 11.2% | Tragic 11.9% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Exceptional 16.7% | Excellent 17.2% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Exceptional 9.9% | Average 10.3% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Fair 6.7% | Good 6.6% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 6.2% | Tragic 5.8% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 4.9% | Tragic 5.0% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Exceptional 4.2% | Average 4.5% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Good 4.8% | Average 4.8% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Exceptional 4.3% | Average 4.9% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 4.7% | Tragic 5.5% |
Seniors > 65 | Exceptional 4.4% | Tragic 5.3% |
Seniors > 75 | Exceptional 7.3% | Tragic 9.1% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 9.0% | Tragic 7.9% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Exceptional 8.6% | Exceptional 8.4% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Good 5.4% | Average 5.4% |
Chickasaw vs Samoan Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 65.5%, a difference of 5.2%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 77.4%, a difference of 3.9%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 3.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 83.3%, a difference of 1.6%), in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 83.3%, a difference of 1.7%), and in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 39.1%, a difference of 2.1%).
Labor Participation Metric | Chickasaw | Samoan |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 62.3% | Exceptional 65.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 76.2% | Tragic 79.0% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Exceptional 38.3% | Exceptional 39.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Poor 74.5% | Exceptional 77.4% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 81.9% | Tragic 83.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 81.9% | Tragic 83.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 80.9% | Tragic 83.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 79.0% | Tragic 81.8% |
Chickasaw vs Samoan Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 18.4%), births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 32.6%, a difference of 11.3%), and single mother households (7.0% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 7.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (46.6% compared to 46.8%, a difference of 0.44%), family households with children (28.2% compared to 29.5%, a difference of 4.5%), and single father households (2.8% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 4.9%).
Family Structure Metric | Chickasaw | Samoan |
Family Households | Good 64.4% | Exceptional 67.9% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 28.2% | Exceptional 29.5% |
Married-couple Households | Fair 45.9% | Exceptional 48.7% |
Average Family Size | Tragic 3.19 | Exceptional 3.42 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 2.8% | Tragic 2.6% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 7.0% | Fair 6.5% |
Currently Married | Average 46.6% | Average 46.8% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 14.2% | Good 12.0% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 36.3% | Fair 32.6% |
Chickasaw vs Samoan Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 24.0%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 25.0%, a difference of 12.5%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 61.5%, a difference of 4.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 92.4%, a difference of 0.18%), no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 3.0%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 61.5%, a difference of 4.2%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Chickasaw | Samoan |
No Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Exceptional 7.6% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 92.3% | Exceptional 92.4% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 59.0% | Exceptional 61.5% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.2% | Exceptional 25.0% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.4% | Exceptional 9.2% |
Chickasaw vs Samoan Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 33.5%), associate's degree (38.6% compared to 41.1%, a difference of 6.6%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 1.4%, a difference of 6.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 11th grade (92.3% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 0.080%), high school diploma (88.4% compared to 88.5%, a difference of 0.12%), and master's degree (11.4% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 0.46%).
Education Level Metric | Chickasaw | Samoan |
No Schooling Completed | Exceptional 1.7% | Tragic 2.3% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.4% | Tragic 97.8% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.4% | Tragic 97.8% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Tragic 97.7% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Tragic 97.7% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Tragic 97.5% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Tragic 97.3% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.9% | Tragic 97.1% |
6th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Poor 96.8% |
7th Grade | Exceptional 96.7% | Tragic 95.7% |
8th Grade | Exceptional 96.4% | Tragic 95.4% |
9th Grade | Exceptional 95.5% | Poor 94.6% |
10th Grade | Excellent 94.1% | Poor 93.4% |
11th Grade | Fair 92.3% | Fair 92.3% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 90.3% | Fair 90.8% |
High School Diploma | Poor 88.4% | Poor 88.5% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 83.8% | Poor 84.9% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 60.4% | Tragic 63.0% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 53.3% | Tragic 56.2% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 38.6% | Tragic 41.1% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 30.4% | Tragic 31.8% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 11.4% | Tragic 11.5% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.4% | Tragic 3.3% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.5% | Tragic 1.4% |
Chickasaw vs Samoan Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 44.4%), vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 43.0%), and hearing disability (4.5% compared to 3.3%, a difference of 35.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 49.5%, a difference of 3.4%), cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.9%, a difference of 3.4%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 12.0%).
Disability Metric | Chickasaw | Samoan |
Disability | Tragic 15.2% | Tragic 12.2% |
Males | Tragic 15.1% | Tragic 11.9% |
Females | Tragic 15.2% | Poor 12.4% |
Age | Under 5 years | Tragic 1.7% | Good 1.2% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.8% | Excellent 5.5% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 9.0% | Tragic 7.0% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Tragic 12.1% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 30.2% | Tragic 25.4% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 51.2% | Tragic 49.5% |
Vision | Tragic 3.2% | Poor 2.2% |
Hearing | Tragic 4.5% | Tragic 3.3% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.5% | Tragic 17.9% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.0% | Poor 6.3% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.9% | Tragic 2.6% |