Immigrants from Zimbabwe vs Immigrants from Africa Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 117,813,757 people shows a near-perfect positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Africa within Immigrant from Zimbabwe communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.923. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Zimbabwe within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.895% in Immigrants from Africa. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Zimbabwe corresponds to an increase of 894.6 Immigrants from Africa.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Africa communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($47,394 compared to $42,950, a difference of 10.3%), wage/income gap (25.3% compared to 23.2%, a difference of 9.3%), and median family income ($108,830 compared to $100,256, a difference of 8.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($51,914 compared to $50,609, a difference of 2.6%), median female earnings ($41,527 compared to $40,257, a difference of 3.2%), and median earnings ($48,913 compared to $46,564, a difference of 5.1%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Africa communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (9.9% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 28.3%), married-couple family poverty (4.3% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 25.5%), and family poverty (8.2% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 21.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (12.6% compared to 12.7%, a difference of 0.96%), single father poverty (16.1% compared to 15.8%, a difference of 2.3%), and single mother poverty (28.1% compared to 29.4%, a difference of 4.8%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Africa communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.0% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 16.9%), male unemployment (4.9% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 13.5%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.3% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 13.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.0% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 0.31%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.0% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 4.1%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.6% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 4.9%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Africa communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (66.8% compared to 67.4%, a difference of 0.83%), in labor force | age 35-44 (85.2% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 0.35%), and in labor force | age 16-19 (38.0% compared to 38.0%, a difference of 0.22%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (75.9% compared to 75.8%, a difference of 0.040%), in labor force | age 25-29 (85.2% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 0.060%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (80.5% compared to 80.4%, a difference of 0.14%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Africa communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (6.2% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 18.1%), births to unmarried women (30.3% compared to 33.0%, a difference of 8.8%), and married-couple households (46.3% compared to 42.9%, a difference of 8.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.8% compared to 28.0%, a difference of 0.47%), family households (63.5% compared to 62.4%, a difference of 1.7%), and average family size (3.19 compared to 3.25, a difference of 1.8%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Africa communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.9% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 27.0%), 3 or more vehicles in household (19.1% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 8.8%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 8.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.2% compared to 87.6%, a difference of 3.0%), 2 or more vehicles in household (55.6% compared to 51.8%, a difference of 7.3%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 8.4%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Africa communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.9% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 28.9%), professional degree (5.3% compared to 4.6%, a difference of 15.5%), and doctorate degree (2.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 11.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.2% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.58%), kindergarten (98.2% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.58%), and 1st grade (98.1% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.59%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Africa communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (3.0% compared to 2.7%, a difference of 8.5%), disability age 35 to 64 (10.6% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 7.7%), and disability age 65 to 74 (22.3% compared to 23.7%, a difference of 6.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (47.2% compared to 47.3%, a difference of 0.25%), male disability (10.8% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 0.64%), and disability age 18 to 34 (6.7% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 0.89%).