Immigrants from Oceania vs Chickasaw Community Comparison
COMPARE
Immigrants from Oceania
Chickasaw
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Immigrants from Oceania
Chickasaw
6,183
SOCIAL INDEX
59.3/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
161st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Chickasaw Integration in Immigrants from Oceania Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 119,698,402 people shows a substantial negative correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Immigrant from Oceania communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.510. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Oceania within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.009% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Oceania corresponds to a decrease of 8.7 Chickasaw.
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chickasaw Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in median household income ($89,100 compared to $70,005, a difference of 27.3%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($103,705 compared to $82,193, a difference of 26.2%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($97,623 compared to $77,929, a difference of 25.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.6% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 5.9%), median male earnings ($55,712 compared to $47,832, a difference of 16.5%), and median earnings ($47,617 compared to $40,672, a difference of 17.1%).
Income Metric | Immigrants from Oceania | Chickasaw |
Per Capita Income | Excellent $45,220 | Tragic $36,475 |
Median Family Income | Excellent $106,453 | Tragic $85,356 |
Median Household Income | Exceptional $89,100 | Tragic $70,005 |
Median Earnings | Excellent $47,617 | Tragic $40,672 |
Median Male Earnings | Good $55,712 | Tragic $47,832 |
Median Female Earnings | Good $40,297 | Tragic $34,414 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Exceptional $53,680 | Tragic $44,763 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Excellent $97,623 | Tragic $77,929 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Excellent $103,705 | Tragic $82,193 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Exceptional $64,416 | Tragic $53,732 |
Wage/Income Gap | Average 25.6% | Tragic 27.2% |
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chickasaw Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single male poverty (12.4% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 31.5%), child poverty under the age of 5 (16.9% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 29.1%), and single female poverty (20.7% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 27.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.7% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 0.19%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.4% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 2.4%), and receiving food stamps (11.4% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 15.0%).
Poverty Metric | Immigrants from Oceania | Chickasaw |
Poverty | Average 12.3% | Tragic 14.7% |
Families | Good 8.7% | Tragic 10.8% |
Males | Average 11.2% | Tragic 13.5% |
Females | Average 13.3% | Tragic 15.9% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Excellent 19.7% | Tragic 24.5% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Average 13.5% | Tragic 17.0% |
Children Under 5 years | Good 16.9% | Tragic 21.8% |
Children Under 16 years | Good 15.9% | Tragic 19.5% |
Boys Under 16 years | Good 16.0% | Tragic 19.8% |
Girls Under 16 years | Good 16.1% | Tragic 19.6% |
Single Males | Exceptional 12.4% | Tragic 16.3% |
Single Females | Good 20.7% | Tragic 26.3% |
Single Fathers | Exceptional 15.4% | Tragic 19.0% |
Single Mothers | Good 28.7% | Tragic 34.4% |
Married Couples | Good 5.0% | Tragic 5.8% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Excellent 10.4% | Good 10.7% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Excellent 11.7% | Exceptional 11.6% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Good 11.4% | Tragic 13.1% |
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chickasaw Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.0% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 22.3%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.5% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 19.8%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.4% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 15.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.38%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.0% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 0.48%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.3% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 1.5%).
Unemployment Metric | Immigrants from Oceania | Chickasaw |
Unemployment | Good 5.2% | Exceptional 5.0% |
Males | Average 5.3% | Excellent 5.2% |
Females | Good 5.2% | Excellent 5.1% |
Youth < 25 | Excellent 11.4% | Exceptional 11.2% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Excellent 17.2% | Exceptional 16.7% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Exceptional 10.0% | Exceptional 9.9% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Exceptional 6.4% | Fair 6.7% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Good 5.4% | Tragic 6.2% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Fair 4.8% | Tragic 4.9% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Excellent 4.4% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Exceptional 4.7% | Good 4.8% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Exceptional 4.7% | Exceptional 4.3% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 5.2% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Seniors > 65 | Exceptional 5.0% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Seniors > 75 | Poor 9.0% | Exceptional 7.3% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Good 7.5% | Tragic 9.0% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Exceptional 8.1% | Exceptional 8.6% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Excellent 5.3% | Good 5.4% |
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chickasaw Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (65.5% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 5.1%), in labor force | age 20-64 (79.3% compared to 76.2%, a difference of 4.1%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (82.1% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 3.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 16-19 (37.9% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 1.1%), in labor force | age 20-24 (76.1% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 2.2%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (84.0% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 2.6%).
Labor Participation Metric | Immigrants from Oceania | Chickasaw |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Excellent 65.5% | Tragic 62.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Poor 79.3% | Tragic 76.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Exceptional 37.9% | Exceptional 38.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Exceptional 76.1% | Poor 74.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 84.2% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 84.0% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 83.9% | Tragic 80.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 82.1% | Tragic 79.0% |
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chickasaw Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in divorced or separated (11.9% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 19.1%), births to unmarried women (30.6% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 18.7%), and single mother households (6.3% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 12.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (46.5% compared to 46.6%, a difference of 0.12%), family households with children (28.1% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 0.38%), and family households (64.9% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 0.78%).
Family Structure Metric | Immigrants from Oceania | Chickasaw |
Family Households | Exceptional 64.9% | Good 64.4% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 28.1% | Exceptional 28.2% |
Married-couple Households | Good 46.9% | Fair 45.9% |
Average Family Size | Exceptional 3.29 | Tragic 3.19 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 2.5% | Tragic 2.8% |
Single Mother Households | Average 6.3% | Tragic 7.0% |
Currently Married | Average 46.5% | Average 46.6% |
Divorced or Separated | Good 11.9% | Tragic 14.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Excellent 30.6% | Tragic 36.3% |
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.7% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 23.8%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.6% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 2.6%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (57.5% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 2.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3 or more vehicles in household (21.8% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 1.8%), 1 or more vehicles in household (90.4% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 2.1%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (57.5% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 2.5%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Immigrants from Oceania | Chickasaw |
No Vehicles Available | Excellent 9.7% | Exceptional 7.9% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Excellent 90.4% | Exceptional 92.3% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 57.5% | Exceptional 59.0% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 21.8% | Exceptional 22.2% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.6% | Exceptional 7.4% |
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chickasaw Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (4.6% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 35.9%), no schooling completed (2.2% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 32.4%), and master's degree (14.7% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 28.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 11th grade (92.2% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 0.11%), high school diploma (88.8% compared to 88.4%, a difference of 0.43%), and nursery school (97.8% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.58%).
Education Level Metric | Immigrants from Oceania | Chickasaw |
No Schooling Completed | Poor 2.2% | Exceptional 1.7% |
Nursery School | Poor 97.8% | Exceptional 98.4% |
Kindergarten | Poor 97.8% | Exceptional 98.4% |
1st Grade | Poor 97.8% | Exceptional 98.3% |
2nd Grade | Poor 97.7% | Exceptional 98.3% |
3rd Grade | Tragic 97.6% | Exceptional 98.2% |
4th Grade | Tragic 97.3% | Exceptional 98.0% |
5th Grade | Poor 97.1% | Exceptional 97.9% |
6th Grade | Poor 96.8% | Exceptional 97.6% |
7th Grade | Tragic 95.7% | Exceptional 96.7% |
8th Grade | Tragic 95.3% | Exceptional 96.4% |
9th Grade | Poor 94.5% | Exceptional 95.5% |
10th Grade | Poor 93.4% | Excellent 94.1% |
11th Grade | Fair 92.2% | Fair 92.3% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Fair 90.9% | Tragic 90.3% |
High School Diploma | Fair 88.8% | Poor 88.4% |
GED/Equivalency | Fair 85.5% | Tragic 83.8% |
College, Under 1 year | Average 65.6% | Tragic 60.4% |
College, 1 year or more | Average 59.4% | Tragic 53.3% |
Associate's Degree | Fair 45.8% | Tragic 38.6% |
Bachelor's Degree | Fair 37.3% | Tragic 30.4% |
Master's Degree | Fair 14.7% | Tragic 11.4% |
Professional Degree | Good 4.6% | Tragic 3.4% |
Doctorate Degree | Good 1.9% | Tragic 1.5% |
Immigrants from Oceania vs Chickasaw Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 49.8%), vision disability (2.2% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 46.3%), and disability age 35 to 64 (11.4% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 41.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.6% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 5.1%), disability age over 75 (48.0% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 6.6%), and self-care disability (2.5% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 14.6%).
Disability Metric | Immigrants from Oceania | Chickasaw |
Disability | Fair 11.8% | Tragic 15.2% |
Males | Fair 11.4% | Tragic 15.1% |
Females | Good 12.1% | Tragic 15.2% |
Age | Under 5 years | Exceptional 1.2% | Tragic 1.7% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Exceptional 5.4% | Tragic 6.8% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Fair 6.7% | Tragic 9.0% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Fair 11.4% | Tragic 16.1% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Poor 24.0% | Tragic 30.2% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 48.0% | Tragic 51.2% |
Vision | Average 2.2% | Tragic 3.2% |
Hearing | Tragic 3.2% | Tragic 4.5% |
Cognitive | Tragic 17.6% | Tragic 18.5% |
Ambulatory | Good 6.1% | Tragic 8.0% |
Self-Care | Fair 2.5% | Tragic 2.9% |