Pima vs Cherokee Community Comparison

COMPARE

Pima
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Cherokee
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHonduranHopiHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ik
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBurma/MyanmarCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMiddle AfricaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireAzores
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Pima

Cherokee

Poor
Fair
1,700
SOCIAL INDEX
14.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
291st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,697
SOCIAL INDEX
24.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
243rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Cherokee Integration in Pima Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 60,871,563 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Cherokee within Pima communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.202. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Pima within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.002% in Cherokee. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Pima corresponds to an increase of 2.2 Cherokee.
Pima Integration in Cherokee Communities

Pima vs Cherokee Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (21.1% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 29.8%), per capita income ($30,644 compared to $37,203, a difference of 21.4%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($73,365 compared to $86,125, a difference of 17.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median female earnings ($35,326 compared to $34,742, a difference of 1.7%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($82,821 compared to $80,843, a difference of 2.5%), and householder income over 65 years ($50,539 compared to $54,133, a difference of 7.1%).
Pima vs Cherokee Income
Income MetricPimaCherokee
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$30,644
Tragic
$37,203
Median Family Income
Tragic
$77,431
Tragic
$88,209
Median Household Income
Tragic
$63,262
Tragic
$72,682
Median Earnings
Tragic
$38,285
Tragic
$41,252
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$42,357
Tragic
$48,669
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$35,326
Tragic
$34,742
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Poor
$51,503
Tragic
$47,848
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$82,821
Tragic
$80,843
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$73,365
Tragic
$86,125
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$50,539
Tragic
$54,133
Wage/Income Gap
Exceptional
21.1%
Tragic
27.4%

Pima vs Cherokee Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (23.9% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 98.6%), married-couple family poverty (11.4% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 97.9%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (19.8% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 80.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother poverty (38.6% compared to 34.5%, a difference of 11.8%), single female poverty (30.3% compared to 25.7%, a difference of 18.2%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (28.4% compared to 22.7%, a difference of 25.3%).
Pima vs Cherokee Poverty
Poverty MetricPimaCherokee
Poverty
Tragic
21.9%
Tragic
14.4%
Families
Tragic
18.4%
Tragic
10.6%
Males
Tragic
20.4%
Tragic
13.1%
Females
Tragic
23.6%
Tragic
15.6%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
28.4%
Tragic
22.7%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
25.3%
Tragic
17.2%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
27.4%
Tragic
21.7%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
29.0%
Tragic
19.5%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
29.7%
Tragic
19.7%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
28.2%
Tragic
19.9%
Single Males
Tragic
20.2%
Tragic
16.1%
Single Females
Tragic
30.3%
Tragic
25.7%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
14.8%
Tragic
19.6%
Single Mothers
Tragic
38.6%
Tragic
34.5%
Married Couples
Tragic
11.4%
Tragic
5.8%
Seniors Over 65 years
Tragic
19.8%
Average
11.0%
Seniors Over 75 years
Tragic
23.9%
Good
12.0%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
19.0%
Tragic
13.2%

Pima vs Cherokee Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (11.8% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 125.0%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (11.7% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 103.5%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (18.9% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 88.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.8% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 3.1%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.2% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 6.8%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (6.6% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 22.2%).
Pima vs Cherokee Unemployment
Unemployment MetricPimaCherokee
Unemployment
Tragic
8.2%
Fair
5.3%
Males
Tragic
8.3%
Tragic
5.6%
Females
Tragic
9.3%
Fair
5.3%
Youth < 25
Tragic
16.2%
Fair
11.8%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Tragic
23.1%
Poor
17.9%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Tragic
14.2%
Tragic
10.5%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Tragic
11.8%
Tragic
7.6%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
9.6%
Tragic
6.4%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
11.8%
Tragic
5.2%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Tragic
6.4%
Poor
4.6%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Tragic
6.6%
Tragic
5.0%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Excellent
4.8%
Poor
4.9%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
6.6%
Fair
5.4%
Seniors > 65
Tragic
6.3%
Excellent
5.1%
Seniors > 75
Tragic
9.2%
Tragic
9.8%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
13.4%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Tragic
18.9%
Tragic
10.0%
Women w/ Children < 18
Tragic
11.7%
Tragic
5.7%

Pima vs Cherokee Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (34.1% compared to 40.2%, a difference of 18.0%), in labor force | age 25-29 (74.3% compared to 82.1%, a difference of 10.5%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (69.0% compared to 76.2%, a difference of 10.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (79.0% compared to 81.6%, a difference of 3.3%), in labor force | age > 16 (57.4% compared to 61.9%, a difference of 7.9%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (72.8% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 8.4%).
Pima vs Cherokee Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricPimaCherokee
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
57.4%
Tragic
61.9%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
69.0%
Tragic
76.2%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Tragic
34.1%
Exceptional
40.2%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Tragic
69.0%
Exceptional
75.9%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
74.3%
Tragic
82.1%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
79.0%
Tragic
81.6%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
74.8%
Tragic
81.4%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
72.8%
Tragic
79.0%

Pima vs Cherokee Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in single father households (4.2% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 59.2%), births to unmarried women (51.5% compared to 36.7%, a difference of 40.4%), and married-couple households (35.6% compared to 46.7%, a difference of 31.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.1% compared to 27.5%, a difference of 1.4%), family households (65.9% compared to 65.0%, a difference of 1.5%), and divorced or separated (12.9% compared to 13.7%, a difference of 6.6%).
Pima vs Cherokee Family Structure
Family Structure MetricPimaCherokee
Family Households
Exceptional
65.9%
Exceptional
65.0%
Family Households with Children
Tragic
27.1%
Average
27.5%
Married-couple Households
Tragic
35.6%
Good
46.7%
Average Family Size
Exceptional
3.75
Tragic
3.18
Single Father Households
Tragic
4.2%
Tragic
2.6%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
8.3%
Tragic
6.8%
Currently Married
Tragic
35.9%
Good
46.9%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
12.9%
Tragic
13.7%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
51.5%
Tragic
36.7%

Pima vs Cherokee Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 82.6%), 2 or more vehicles in household (52.0% compared to 59.9%, a difference of 15.1%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (86.3% compared to 92.4%, a difference of 7.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 4 or more vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 1.6%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.0% compared to 23.0%, a difference of 4.3%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (86.3% compared to 92.4%, a difference of 7.1%).
Pima vs Cherokee Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricPimaCherokee
No Vehicles Available
Tragic
14.1%
Exceptional
7.7%
1+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
86.3%
Exceptional
92.4%
2+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
52.0%
Exceptional
59.9%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.0%
Exceptional
23.0%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Exceptional
7.7%

Pima vs Cherokee Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in bachelor's degree (23.2% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 30.1%), associate's degree (30.2% compared to 38.9%, a difference of 28.6%), and master's degree (9.2% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 22.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1st grade (98.2% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.10%), nursery school (98.2% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.11%), and kindergarten (98.2% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.11%).
Pima vs Cherokee Education Level
Education Level MetricPimaCherokee
No Schooling Completed
Average
2.1%
Exceptional
1.7%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.3%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.3%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.3%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.3%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Exceptional
98.2%
4th Grade
Exceptional
97.7%
Exceptional
98.0%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Exceptional
97.8%
6th Grade
Excellent
97.2%
Exceptional
97.6%
7th Grade
Good
96.1%
Exceptional
96.8%
8th Grade
Fair
95.6%
Exceptional
96.5%
9th Grade
Tragic
93.9%
Exceptional
95.4%
10th Grade
Tragic
91.2%
Excellent
94.1%
11th Grade
Tragic
88.3%
Average
92.4%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
84.6%
Tragic
90.5%
High School Diploma
Tragic
81.6%
Poor
88.5%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
76.4%
Tragic
83.9%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
51.4%
Tragic
60.1%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
45.6%
Tragic
53.2%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
30.2%
Tragic
38.9%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
23.2%
Tragic
30.2%
Master's Degree
Tragic
9.2%
Tragic
11.4%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.3%
Tragic
3.3%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.3%
Tragic
1.5%

Pima vs Cherokee Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 66.9%), disability age 65 to 74 (38.6% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 36.9%), and male disability (12.8% compared to 14.8%, a difference of 15.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female disability (14.8% compared to 14.9%, a difference of 0.48%), self-care disability (2.8% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 3.5%), and disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 15.5%, a difference of 4.4%).
Pima vs Cherokee Disability
Disability MetricPimaCherokee
Disability
Tragic
13.7%
Tragic
14.8%
Males
Tragic
12.8%
Tragic
14.8%
Females
Tragic
14.8%
Tragic
14.9%
Age | Under 5 years
Exceptional
1.1%
Tragic
1.8%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.2%
Tragic
6.9%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
7.7%
Tragic
8.7%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Tragic
15.5%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
38.6%
Tragic
28.2%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
55.8%
Tragic
50.2%
Vision
Tragic
3.3%
Tragic
2.9%
Hearing
Tragic
3.7%
Tragic
4.2%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.8%
Tragic
18.0%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.2%
Tragic
7.9%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.8%
Tragic
2.9%