Immigrants vs Chickasaw Community Comparison
COMPARE
Immigrants
Chickasaw
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Immigrants
Chickasaw
3,042
SOCIAL INDEX
28.0/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
235th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Chickasaw Integration in Immigrants Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 144,949,379 people shows a mild negative correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Immigrant communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.379. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.002% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants corresponds to a decrease of 1.8 Chickasaw.
Immigrants vs Chickasaw Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in median household income ($85,818 compared to $70,005, a difference of 22.6%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($99,943 compared to $82,193, a difference of 21.6%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($94,423 compared to $77,929, a difference of 21.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.1% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 8.1%), householder income over 65 years ($59,656 compared to $53,732, a difference of 11.0%), and median male earnings ($54,168 compared to $47,832, a difference of 13.3%).
Income Metric | Immigrants | Chickasaw |
Per Capita Income | Fair $43,010 | Tragic $36,475 |
Median Family Income | Fair $100,962 | Tragic $85,356 |
Median Household Income | Good $85,818 | Tragic $70,005 |
Median Earnings | Average $46,478 | Tragic $40,672 |
Median Male Earnings | Average $54,168 | Tragic $47,832 |
Median Female Earnings | Fair $39,328 | Tragic $34,414 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Exceptional $53,201 | Tragic $44,763 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Average $94,423 | Tragic $77,929 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Average $99,943 | Tragic $82,193 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Fair $59,656 | Tragic $53,732 |
Wage/Income Gap | Excellent 25.1% | Tragic 27.2% |
Immigrants vs Chickasaw Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single male poverty (12.7% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 28.9%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.3% compared to 24.5%, a difference of 26.7%), and single female poverty (21.4% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 22.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (13.0% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 0.73%), married-couple family poverty (6.0% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 4.2%), and family poverty (10.0% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 8.7%).
Poverty Metric | Immigrants | Chickasaw |
Poverty | Tragic 13.2% | Tragic 14.7% |
Families | Tragic 10.0% | Tragic 10.8% |
Males | Tragic 12.0% | Tragic 13.5% |
Females | Tragic 14.4% | Tragic 15.9% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Exceptional 19.3% | Tragic 24.5% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Poor 14.0% | Tragic 17.0% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 18.2% | Tragic 21.8% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 17.5% | Tragic 19.5% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 17.6% | Tragic 19.8% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 17.7% | Tragic 19.6% |
Single Males | Good 12.7% | Tragic 16.3% |
Single Females | Fair 21.4% | Tragic 26.3% |
Single Fathers | Exceptional 15.9% | Tragic 19.0% |
Single Mothers | Poor 29.7% | Tragic 34.4% |
Married Couples | Tragic 6.0% | Tragic 5.8% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Tragic 12.4% | Good 10.7% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Tragic 13.9% | Exceptional 11.6% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 13.0% | Tragic 13.1% |
Immigrants vs Chickasaw Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.4% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 21.5%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.7% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 19.0%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.6% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 18.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.9% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 0.62%), unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.9% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 2.7%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (5.0% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 4.5%).
Unemployment Metric | Immigrants | Chickasaw |
Unemployment | Tragic 5.5% | Exceptional 5.0% |
Males | Tragic 5.5% | Excellent 5.2% |
Females | Tragic 5.7% | Excellent 5.1% |
Youth < 25 | Tragic 12.1% | Exceptional 11.2% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Tragic 18.3% | Exceptional 16.7% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Tragic 10.6% | Exceptional 9.9% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Tragic 6.9% | Fair 6.7% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 5.7% | Tragic 6.2% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 4.9% | Tragic 4.9% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Tragic 4.7% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Tragic 5.0% | Good 4.8% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Tragic 5.1% | Exceptional 4.3% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 5.6% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Seniors > 65 | Tragic 5.4% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Seniors > 75 | Average 8.7% | Exceptional 7.3% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Fair 7.8% | Tragic 9.0% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Fair 9.1% | Exceptional 8.6% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Tragic 5.8% | Good 5.4% |
Immigrants vs Chickasaw Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (34.6% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 10.9%), in labor force | age > 16 (65.4% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 5.0%), 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 20-24 (74.1% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 0.42%), in labor force | age 25-29 (83.9% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 2.5%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (84.1% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 2.7%).
Labor Participation Metric | Immigrants | Chickasaw |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Excellent 65.4% | Tragic 62.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 79.2% | Tragic 76.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Tragic 34.6% | Exceptional 38.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Tragic 74.1% | Poor 74.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 83.9% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 84.1% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 83.7% | Tragic 80.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 82.1% | Tragic 79.0% |
Immigrants vs Chickasaw Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in divorced or separated (11.8% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 20.6%), single father households (2.5% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 12.1%), and births to unmarried women (32.7% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 11.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple households (46.3% compared to 45.9%, a difference of 0.93%), currently married (45.8% compared to 46.6%, a difference of 1.8%), and family households with children (28.9% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 2.5%).
Family Structure Metric | Immigrants | Chickasaw |
Family Households | Exceptional 66.1% | Good 64.4% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 28.9% | Exceptional 28.2% |
Married-couple Households | Average 46.3% | Fair 45.9% |
Average Family Size | Exceptional 3.33 | Tragic 3.19 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 2.5% | Tragic 2.8% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 6.8% | Tragic 7.0% |
Currently Married | Poor 45.8% | Average 46.6% |
Divorced or Separated | Exceptional 11.8% | Tragic 14.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Fair 32.7% | Tragic 36.3% |
Immigrants vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (11.7% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 48.4%), 3 or more vehicles in household (20.0% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 10.8%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (6.8% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 9.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.1% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 2.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (54.7% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 7.8%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (6.8% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 9.6%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Immigrants | Chickasaw |
No Vehicles Available | Tragic 11.7% | Exceptional 7.9% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Good 90.1% | Exceptional 92.3% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Fair 54.7% | Exceptional 59.0% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Excellent 20.0% | Exceptional 22.2% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 6.8% | Exceptional 7.4% |
Immigrants vs Chickasaw Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.8% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 64.6%), professional degree (4.4% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 29.8%), and master's degree (14.6% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 28.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.2% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 1.2%), kindergarten (97.2% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 1.2%), and 1st grade (97.2% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 1.2%).
Education Level Metric | Immigrants | Chickasaw |
No Schooling Completed | Tragic 2.8% | Exceptional 1.7% |
Nursery School | Tragic 97.2% | Exceptional 98.4% |
Kindergarten | Tragic 97.2% | Exceptional 98.4% |
1st Grade | Tragic 97.2% | Exceptional 98.3% |
2nd Grade | Tragic 97.1% | Exceptional 98.3% |
3rd Grade | Tragic 96.9% | Exceptional 98.2% |
4th Grade | Tragic 96.5% | Exceptional 98.0% |
5th Grade | Tragic 96.2% | Exceptional 97.9% |
6th Grade | Tragic 95.7% | Exceptional 97.6% |
7th Grade | Tragic 94.0% | Exceptional 96.7% |
8th Grade | Tragic 93.6% | Exceptional 96.4% |
9th Grade | Tragic 92.5% | Exceptional 95.5% |
10th Grade | Tragic 91.0% | Excellent 94.1% |
11th Grade | Tragic 89.7% | Fair 92.3% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 88.2% | Tragic 90.3% |
High School Diploma | Tragic 85.8% | Poor 88.4% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 82.6% | Tragic 83.8% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 62.5% | Tragic 60.4% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 57.0% | Tragic 53.3% |
Associate's Degree | Poor 44.5% | Tragic 38.6% |
Bachelor's Degree | Fair 36.7% | Tragic 30.4% |
Master's Degree | Fair 14.6% | Tragic 11.4% |
Professional Degree | Average 4.4% | Tragic 3.4% |
Doctorate Degree | Average 1.8% | Tragic 1.5% |
Immigrants vs Chickasaw Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (2.8% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 57.7%), disability age 35 to 64 (10.7% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 50.5%), and disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 47.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (48.2% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 6.3%), cognitive disability (17.2% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 7.4%), and self-care disability (2.5% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 13.6%).
Disability Metric | Immigrants | Chickasaw |
Disability | Exceptional 11.3% | Tragic 15.2% |
Males | Exceptional 10.8% | Tragic 15.1% |
Females | Exceptional 11.7% | Tragic 15.2% |
Age | Under 5 years | Excellent 1.2% | Tragic 1.7% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Exceptional 5.4% | Tragic 6.8% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Exceptional 6.2% | Tragic 9.0% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Exceptional 10.7% | Tragic 16.1% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Fair 23.7% | Tragic 30.2% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 48.2% | Tragic 51.2% |
Vision | Fair 2.2% | Tragic 3.2% |
Hearing | Exceptional 2.8% | Tragic 4.5% |
Cognitive | Good 17.2% | Tragic 18.5% |
Ambulatory | Excellent 6.0% | Tragic 8.0% |
Self-Care | Poor 2.5% | Tragic 2.9% |