Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Community Comparison

COMPARE

Tohono O'odham
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta 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
Chickasaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHonduranHopiHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianThaiTlingit-HaidaTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabwe
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Tohono O'odham

Chickasaw

Tragic
Fair
686
SOCIAL INDEX
4.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
339th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Chickasaw Integration in Tohono O'odham Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 45,326,889 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Tohono O'odham communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.164. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Tohono O'odham within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.034% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Tohono O'odham corresponds to a decrease of 34.4 Chickasaw.
Tohono O'odham Integration in Chickasaw Communities

Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (22.1% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 22.7%), median male earnings ($39,543 compared to $47,832, a difference of 21.0%), and per capita income ($30,256 compared to $36,475, a difference of 20.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($45,248 compared to $44,763, a difference of 1.1%), median female earnings ($33,205 compared to $34,414, a difference of 3.6%), and householder income over 65 years ($49,121 compared to $53,732, a difference of 9.4%).
Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Income
Income MetricTohono O'odhamChickasaw
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$30,256
Tragic
$36,475
Median Family Income
Tragic
$72,193
Tragic
$85,356
Median Household Income
Tragic
$61,663
Tragic
$70,005
Median Earnings
Tragic
$36,349
Tragic
$40,672
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$39,543
Tragic
$47,832
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$33,205
Tragic
$34,414
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$45,248
Tragic
$44,763
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$69,068
Tragic
$77,929
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$73,774
Tragic
$82,193
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$49,121
Tragic
$53,732
Wage/Income Gap
Exceptional
22.1%
Tragic
27.2%

Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 65 (20.8% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 95.0%), married-couple family poverty (11.2% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 93.8%), and family poverty (20.4% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 88.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (22.0% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 16.1%), single mother poverty (43.0% compared to 34.4%, a difference of 25.0%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (31.0% compared to 24.5%, a difference of 26.7%).
Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Poverty
Poverty MetricTohono O'odhamChickasaw
Poverty
Tragic
24.4%
Tragic
14.7%
Families
Tragic
20.4%
Tragic
10.8%
Males
Tragic
22.9%
Tragic
13.5%
Females
Tragic
25.9%
Tragic
15.9%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
31.0%
Tragic
24.5%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
24.7%
Tragic
17.0%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
29.5%
Tragic
21.8%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
31.7%
Tragic
19.5%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
31.6%
Tragic
19.8%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
31.6%
Tragic
19.6%
Single Males
Tragic
21.6%
Tragic
16.3%
Single Females
Tragic
34.2%
Tragic
26.3%
Single Fathers
Tragic
22.0%
Tragic
19.0%
Single Mothers
Tragic
43.0%
Tragic
34.4%
Married Couples
Tragic
11.2%
Tragic
5.8%
Seniors Over 65 years
Tragic
20.8%
Good
10.7%
Seniors Over 75 years
Tragic
19.1%
Exceptional
11.6%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
21.5%
Tragic
13.1%

Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in male unemployment (10.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 96.5%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (9.3% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 94.6%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (12.1% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 79.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 6 years (10.2% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 13.8%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.0% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 15.1%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (13.8% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 23.4%).
Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Unemployment
Unemployment MetricTohono O'odhamChickasaw
Unemployment
Tragic
8.9%
Exceptional
5.0%
Males
Tragic
10.2%
Excellent
5.2%
Females
Tragic
7.7%
Excellent
5.1%
Youth < 25
Tragic
13.8%
Exceptional
11.2%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Tragic
22.1%
Exceptional
16.7%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Tragic
12.5%
Exceptional
9.9%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Tragic
12.1%
Fair
6.7%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
9.8%
Tragic
6.2%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
8.4%
Tragic
4.9%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Tragic
6.3%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Tragic
9.3%
Good
4.8%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Tragic
5.0%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
6.0%
Exceptional
4.7%
Seniors > 65
Tragic
6.1%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors > 75
Tragic
10.8%
Exceptional
7.3%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
10.2%
Tragic
9.0%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Tragic
10.7%
Exceptional
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 18
Tragic
8.9%
Good
5.4%

Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.3% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 22.5%), in labor force | age 35-44 (74.1% compared to 80.9%, a difference of 9.2%), and in labor force | age > 16 (57.2% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 8.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (75.1% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 5.2%), in labor force | age 30-34 (77.7% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 5.4%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (77.5% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 5.6%).
Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricTohono O'odhamChickasaw
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
57.2%
Tragic
62.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
70.4%
Tragic
76.2%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Tragic
31.3%
Exceptional
38.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Tragic
68.6%
Poor
74.5%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
77.5%
Tragic
81.9%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
77.7%
Tragic
81.9%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
74.1%
Tragic
80.9%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
75.1%
Tragic
79.0%

Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single father households (3.8% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 38.9%), births to unmarried women (49.8% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 37.3%), and single mother households (9.1% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 29.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (28.0% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 0.76%), family households (67.1% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 4.2%), and average family size (3.53 compared to 3.19, a difference of 10.8%).
Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Family Structure
Family Structure MetricTohono O'odhamChickasaw
Family Households
Exceptional
67.1%
Good
64.4%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.0%
Exceptional
28.2%
Married-couple Households
Tragic
37.9%
Fair
45.9%
Average Family Size
Exceptional
3.53
Tragic
3.19
Single Father Households
Tragic
3.8%
Tragic
2.8%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
9.1%
Tragic
7.0%
Currently Married
Tragic
36.8%
Average
46.6%
Divorced or Separated
Good
12.0%
Tragic
14.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
49.8%
Tragic
36.3%

Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (15.6% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 98.8%), 2 or more vehicles in household (50.0% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 18.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.9% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 17.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (84.7% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 8.9%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.6% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 12.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.9% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 17.7%).
Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricTohono O'odhamChickasaw
No Vehicles Available
Tragic
15.6%
Exceptional
7.9%
1+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
84.7%
Exceptional
92.3%
2+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
50.0%
Exceptional
59.0%
3+ Vehicles Available
Poor
18.9%
Exceptional
22.2%
4+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
6.6%
Exceptional
7.4%

Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.3% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 36.4%), bachelor's degree (24.4% compared to 30.4%, a difference of 24.5%), and associate's degree (31.8% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 21.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.9% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.51%), kindergarten (97.9% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.51%), and 1st grade (97.8% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.52%).
Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Education Level
Education Level MetricTohono O'odhamChickasaw
No Schooling Completed
Tragic
2.3%
Exceptional
1.7%
Nursery School
Fair
97.9%
Exceptional
98.4%
Kindergarten
Fair
97.9%
Exceptional
98.4%
1st Grade
Fair
97.8%
Exceptional
98.3%
2nd Grade
Fair
97.8%
Exceptional
98.3%
3rd Grade
Poor
97.6%
Exceptional
98.2%
4th Grade
Tragic
97.3%
Exceptional
98.0%
5th Grade
Tragic
97.0%
Exceptional
97.9%
6th Grade
Tragic
96.5%
Exceptional
97.6%
7th Grade
Tragic
95.0%
Exceptional
96.7%
8th Grade
Tragic
94.5%
Exceptional
96.4%
9th Grade
Tragic
92.6%
Exceptional
95.5%
10th Grade
Tragic
90.1%
Excellent
94.1%
11th Grade
Tragic
87.6%
Fair
92.3%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
84.7%
Tragic
90.3%
High School Diploma
Tragic
82.1%
Poor
88.4%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
77.5%
Tragic
83.8%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
52.8%
Tragic
60.4%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
47.1%
Tragic
53.3%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
31.8%
Tragic
38.6%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
24.4%
Tragic
30.4%
Master's Degree
Tragic
9.7%
Tragic
11.4%
Professional Degree
Tragic
2.8%
Tragic
3.4%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Tragic
1.5%

Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (2.2% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 25.7%), disability age 18 to 34 (7.3% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 23.1%), and disability age 65 to 74 (36.0% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 19.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female disability (15.0% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 1.5%), disability (14.8% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 2.7%), and male disability (14.6% compared to 15.1%, a difference of 3.5%).
Tohono O'odham vs Chickasaw Disability
Disability MetricTohono O'odhamChickasaw
Disability
Tragic
14.8%
Tragic
15.2%
Males
Tragic
14.6%
Tragic
15.1%
Females
Tragic
15.0%
Tragic
15.2%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
2.2%
Tragic
1.7%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.5%
Tragic
6.8%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
7.3%
Tragic
9.0%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.7%
Tragic
16.1%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
36.0%
Tragic
30.2%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
56.7%
Tragic
51.2%
Vision
Tragic
2.8%
Tragic
3.2%
Hearing
Tragic
4.2%
Tragic
4.5%
Cognitive
Tragic
19.3%
Tragic
18.5%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.7%
Tragic
8.0%
Self-Care
Tragic
3.1%
Tragic
2.9%