Houma vs Chickasaw Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 28,334,074 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Houma communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.759. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Houma within a typical geography, there is an increase of 2.467% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Houma corresponds to an increase of 2,466.8 Chickasaw.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Houma and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (38.7% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 42.3%), householder income over 65 years ($44,822 compared to $53,732, a difference of 19.9%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($72,093 compared to $82,193, a difference of 14.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($44,356 compared to $44,763, a difference of 0.92%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,044 compared to $77,929, a difference of 1.1%), and median earnings ($38,949 compared to $40,672, a difference of 4.4%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Houma and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single male poverty (23.5% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 43.7%), single father poverty (26.7% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 41.1%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (16.2% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 39.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of child poverty under the age of 5 (22.7% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 4.1%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (26.2% compared to 24.5%, a difference of 7.0%), and child poverty among girls under 16 (21.5% compared to 19.6%, a difference of 9.4%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Houma and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (7.8% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 59.2%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (12.5% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 45.0%), and male unemployment (7.1% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 37.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.4% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 4.9%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.8% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 8.2%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.9% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 13.2%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Houma and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (35.6% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 7.6%), in labor force | age 45-54 (74.1% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 6.7%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (72.7% compared to 76.2%, a difference of 4.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (81.2% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 0.80%), in labor force | age 20-24 (73.7% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 1.1%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (79.5% compared to 80.9%, a difference of 1.8%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Houma and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (46.6% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 28.3%), single mother households (7.9% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 12.6%), and single father households (2.9% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 6.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.18 compared to 3.19, a difference of 0.28%), family households with children (28.5% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 1.1%), and family households (65.7% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 2.0%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Houma and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (4.9% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 51.4%), no vehicles in household (11.5% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 45.9%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (16.1% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 38.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (88.6% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 4.1%), 2 or more vehicles in household (54.4% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 8.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (16.1% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 38.2%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Houma and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.8% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 64.4%), doctorate degree (0.96% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 57.5%), and professional degree (2.2% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 51.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3rd grade (97.1% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 1.1%), 2nd grade (97.2% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 1.1%), and nursery school (97.3% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 1.1%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Houma and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in disability age 5 to 17 (9.1% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 32.4%), disability age 35 to 64 (18.7% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 16.1%), and ambulatory disability (9.3% compared to 8.0%, a difference of 15.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (19.3% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 4.2%), self-care disability (3.0% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 4.4%), and hearing disability (4.2% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 5.8%).