Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Community Comparison

COMPARE

Tohono O'odham
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch 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
Czechoslovakian
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

Czechoslovakians

Tragic
Good
686
SOCIAL INDEX
4.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
339th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
7,027
SOCIAL INDEX
67.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
132nd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Czechoslovakian Integration in Tohono O'odham Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 53,982,848 people shows a near-perfect positive correlation between the proportion of Czechoslovakians within Tohono O'odham communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.944. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Tohono O'odham within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.097% in Czechoslovakians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Tohono O'odham corresponds to an increase of 96.6 Czechoslovakians.
Tohono O'odham Integration in Czechoslovakian Communities

Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($30,256 compared to $43,806, a difference of 44.8%), median family income ($72,193 compared to $103,273, a difference of 43.0%), and median male earnings ($39,543 compared to $55,382, a difference of 40.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($45,248 compared to $51,224, a difference of 13.2%), median female earnings ($33,205 compared to $38,738, a difference of 16.7%), and householder income over 65 years ($49,121 compared to $60,581, a difference of 23.3%).
Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Income
Income MetricTohono O'odhamCzechoslovakian
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$30,256
Average
$43,806
Median Family Income
Tragic
$72,193
Average
$103,273
Median Household Income
Tragic
$61,663
Average
$84,965
Median Earnings
Tragic
$36,349
Average
$46,658
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$39,543
Good
$55,382
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$33,205
Poor
$38,738
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$45,248
Tragic
$51,224
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$69,068
Average
$95,070
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$73,774
Good
$101,387
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$49,121
Average
$60,581
Wage/Income Gap
Exceptional
22.1%
Tragic
28.2%

Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (11.2% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 157.9%), family poverty (20.4% compared to 8.0%, a difference of 154.9%), and male poverty (22.9% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 121.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (22.0% compared to 17.1%, a difference of 28.9%), single mother poverty (43.0% compared to 29.7%, a difference of 44.7%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (31.0% compared to 20.0%, a difference of 55.2%).
Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Poverty
Poverty MetricTohono O'odhamCzechoslovakian
Poverty
Tragic
24.4%
Exceptional
11.4%
Families
Tragic
20.4%
Exceptional
8.0%
Males
Tragic
22.9%
Exceptional
10.3%
Females
Tragic
25.9%
Exceptional
12.4%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
31.0%
Good
20.0%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
24.7%
Fair
13.7%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
29.5%
Good
16.8%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
31.7%
Exceptional
15.1%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
31.6%
Exceptional
15.3%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
31.6%
Excellent
15.5%
Single Males
Tragic
21.6%
Tragic
13.4%
Single Females
Tragic
34.2%
Fair
21.3%
Single Fathers
Tragic
22.0%
Tragic
17.1%
Single Mothers
Tragic
43.0%
Poor
29.7%
Married Couples
Tragic
11.2%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors Over 65 years
Tragic
20.8%
Exceptional
9.5%
Seniors Over 75 years
Tragic
19.1%
Exceptional
10.9%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
21.5%
Exceptional
10.3%

Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in male unemployment (10.2% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 104.9%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (9.3% compared to 4.6%, a difference of 102.7%), and unemployment (8.9% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 85.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.0% compared to 4.6%, a difference of 8.1%), unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (6.0% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 14.1%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (10.8% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 14.5%).
Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Unemployment
Unemployment MetricTohono O'odhamCzechoslovakian
Unemployment
Tragic
8.9%
Exceptional
4.8%
Males
Tragic
10.2%
Exceptional
5.0%
Females
Tragic
7.7%
Exceptional
4.8%
Youth < 25
Tragic
13.8%
Exceptional
11.0%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Tragic
22.1%
Exceptional
16.5%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Tragic
12.5%
Exceptional
9.9%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Tragic
12.1%
Average
6.7%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
9.8%
Good
5.4%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
8.4%
Excellent
4.6%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Tragic
6.3%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Tragic
9.3%
Exceptional
4.6%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Tragic
5.0%
Exceptional
4.6%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
6.0%
Excellent
5.3%
Seniors > 65
Tragic
6.1%
Exceptional
5.0%
Seniors > 75
Tragic
10.8%
Tragic
9.4%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
10.2%
Fair
7.7%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Tragic
10.7%
Fair
9.1%
Women w/ Children < 18
Tragic
8.9%
Exceptional
5.1%

Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.3% compared to 41.9%, a difference of 33.9%), in labor force | age 35-44 (74.1% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 14.1%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (70.4% compared to 79.5%, a difference of 13.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (77.7% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 9.0%), in labor force | age 25-29 (77.5% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 9.7%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (75.1% compared to 83.0%, a difference of 10.4%).
Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricTohono O'odhamCzechoslovakian
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
57.2%
Tragic
64.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
70.4%
Average
79.5%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Tragic
31.3%
Exceptional
41.9%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Tragic
68.6%
Exceptional
77.5%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
77.5%
Exceptional
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
77.7%
Good
84.8%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
74.1%
Excellent
84.6%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
75.1%
Good
83.0%

Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in single father households (3.8% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 64.6%), births to unmarried women (49.8% compared to 32.0%, a difference of 55.6%), and single mother households (9.1% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 55.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of divorced or separated (12.0% compared to 12.3%, a difference of 2.1%), family households with children (28.0% compared to 27.0%, a difference of 3.5%), and family households (67.1% compared to 64.6%, a difference of 3.9%).
Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Family Structure
Family Structure MetricTohono O'odhamCzechoslovakian
Family Households
Exceptional
67.1%
Excellent
64.6%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.0%
Tragic
27.0%
Married-couple Households
Tragic
37.9%
Exceptional
48.5%
Average Family Size
Exceptional
3.53
Tragic
3.13
Single Father Households
Tragic
3.8%
Average
2.3%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
9.1%
Exceptional
5.9%
Currently Married
Tragic
36.8%
Exceptional
48.8%
Divorced or Separated
Good
12.0%
Poor
12.3%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
49.8%
Fair
32.0%

Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (15.6% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 99.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (50.0% compared to 59.8%, a difference of 19.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.9% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 15.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 4 or more vehicles in household (6.6% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 7.3%), 1 or more vehicles in household (84.7% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 9.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.9% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 15.2%).
Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricTohono O'odhamCzechoslovakian
No Vehicles Available
Tragic
15.6%
Exceptional
7.8%
1+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
84.7%
Exceptional
92.3%
2+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
50.0%
Exceptional
59.8%
3+ Vehicles Available
Poor
18.9%
Exceptional
21.7%
4+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
6.6%
Exceptional
7.1%

Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in bachelor's degree (24.4% compared to 37.0%, a difference of 51.6%), master's degree (9.7% compared to 14.5%, a difference of 49.5%), and professional degree (2.8% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 47.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of kindergarten (97.9% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.58%), nursery school (97.9% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.59%), and 1st grade (97.8% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.60%).
Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Education Level
Education Level MetricTohono O'odhamCzechoslovakian
No Schooling Completed
Tragic
2.3%
Exceptional
1.6%
Nursery School
Fair
97.9%
Exceptional
98.5%
Kindergarten
Fair
97.9%
Exceptional
98.4%
1st Grade
Fair
97.8%
Exceptional
98.4%
2nd Grade
Fair
97.8%
Exceptional
98.4%
3rd Grade
Poor
97.6%
Exceptional
98.3%
4th Grade
Tragic
97.3%
Exceptional
98.1%
5th Grade
Tragic
97.0%
Exceptional
98.0%
6th Grade
Tragic
96.5%
Exceptional
97.8%
7th Grade
Tragic
95.0%
Exceptional
97.1%
8th Grade
Tragic
94.5%
Exceptional
96.9%
9th Grade
Tragic
92.6%
Exceptional
96.1%
10th Grade
Tragic
90.1%
Exceptional
95.1%
11th Grade
Tragic
87.6%
Exceptional
94.0%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
84.7%
Exceptional
92.6%
High School Diploma
Tragic
82.1%
Exceptional
90.9%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
77.5%
Exceptional
87.4%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
52.8%
Good
65.8%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
47.1%
Average
59.4%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
31.8%
Average
46.0%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
24.4%
Fair
37.0%
Master's Degree
Tragic
9.7%
Fair
14.5%
Professional Degree
Tragic
2.8%
Fair
4.2%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Fair
1.8%

Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Tohono O'odham and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in disability age 65 to 74 (36.0% compared to 23.0%, a difference of 56.6%), disability age under 5 (2.2% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 44.7%), and disability age 35 to 64 (16.7% compared to 11.8%, a difference of 42.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age 18 to 34 (7.3% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 2.1%), disability age 5 to 17 (6.5% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 9.6%), and cognitive disability (19.3% compared to 16.6%, a difference of 16.1%).
Tohono O'odham vs Czechoslovakian Disability
Disability MetricTohono O'odhamCzechoslovakian
Disability
Tragic
14.8%
Tragic
12.5%
Males
Tragic
14.6%
Tragic
12.3%
Females
Tragic
15.0%
Tragic
12.7%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
2.2%
Tragic
1.5%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.5%
Tragic
5.9%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
7.3%
Tragic
7.4%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.7%
Tragic
11.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
36.0%
Good
23.0%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
56.7%
Exceptional
46.6%
Vision
Tragic
2.8%
Fair
2.2%
Hearing
Tragic
4.2%
Tragic
3.6%
Cognitive
Tragic
19.3%
Exceptional
16.6%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.7%
Tragic
6.4%
Self-Care
Tragic
3.1%
Average
2.5%