Yuman vs Chickasaw Community Comparison
COMPARE
Yuman
Chickasaw
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Yuman
Chickasaw
959
SOCIAL INDEX
7.1/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
331st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Chickasaw Integration in Yuman Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 32,358,047 people shows a very strong positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Yuman communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.810. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Yuman within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.040% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Yuman corresponds to an increase of 40.2 Chickasaw.
Yuman vs Chickasaw Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Yuman and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (23.3% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 16.4%), householder income under 25 years ($50,933 compared to $44,763, a difference of 13.8%), and per capita income ($33,236 compared to $36,475, a difference of 9.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,139 compared to $82,193, a difference of 0.070%), householder income over 65 years ($53,110 compared to $53,732, a difference of 1.2%), and median household income ($68,743 compared to $70,005, a difference of 1.8%).
Income Metric | Yuman | Chickasaw |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $33,236 | Tragic $36,475 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $78,055 | Tragic $85,356 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $68,743 | Tragic $70,005 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $39,523 | Tragic $40,672 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $45,446 | Tragic $47,832 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $35,377 | Tragic $34,414 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Tragic $50,933 | Tragic $44,763 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $72,956 | Tragic $77,929 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $82,139 | Tragic $82,193 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $53,110 | Tragic $53,732 |
Wage/Income Gap | Exceptional 23.3% | Tragic 27.2% |
Yuman vs Chickasaw Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Yuman and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (9.7% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 68.1%), child poverty among boys under 16 (30.6% compared to 19.8%, a difference of 54.7%), and receiving food stamps (20.2% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 54.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (24.0% compared to 24.5%, a difference of 2.1%), single mother poverty (37.8% compared to 34.4%, a difference of 9.7%), and single female poverty (29.4% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 12.1%).
Poverty Metric | Yuman | Chickasaw |
Poverty | Tragic 20.2% | Tragic 14.7% |
Families | Tragic 16.6% | Tragic 10.8% |
Males | Tragic 19.5% | Tragic 13.5% |
Females | Tragic 20.8% | Tragic 15.9% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 24.0% | Tragic 24.5% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 22.9% | Tragic 17.0% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 29.5% | Tragic 21.8% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 28.9% | Tragic 19.5% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 30.6% | Tragic 19.8% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 27.1% | Tragic 19.6% |
Single Males | Tragic 21.3% | Tragic 16.3% |
Single Females | Tragic 29.4% | Tragic 26.3% |
Single Fathers | Tragic 28.4% | Tragic 19.0% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 37.8% | Tragic 34.4% |
Married Couples | Tragic 9.7% | Tragic 5.8% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Tragic 13.1% | Good 10.7% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Tragic 15.4% | Exceptional 11.6% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 20.2% | Tragic 13.1% |
Yuman vs Chickasaw Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Yuman and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (16.9% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 243.6%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (37.4% compared to 16.7%, a difference of 124.6%), and unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (9.5% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 123.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 75 years (6.7% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 10.3%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (6.1% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 28.0%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.8% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 31.6%).
Unemployment Metric | Yuman | Chickasaw |
Unemployment | Tragic 9.1% | Exceptional 5.0% |
Males | Tragic 8.6% | Excellent 5.2% |
Females | Tragic 9.6% | Excellent 5.1% |
Youth < 25 | Tragic 16.3% | Exceptional 11.2% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Tragic 37.4% | Exceptional 16.7% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Tragic 15.8% | Exceptional 9.9% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Tragic 11.0% | Fair 6.7% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 10.6% | Tragic 6.2% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 16.9% | Tragic 4.9% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Tragic 9.5% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Tragic 6.1% | Good 4.8% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Tragic 6.8% | Exceptional 4.3% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 6.2% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Seniors > 65 | Tragic 5.8% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Seniors > 75 | Exceptional 6.7% | Exceptional 7.3% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 14.6% | Tragic 9.0% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Tragic 14.8% | Exceptional 8.6% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Tragic 9.8% | Good 5.4% |
Yuman vs Chickasaw Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Yuman and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (27.7% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 38.6%), in labor force | age 35-44 (74.7% compared to 80.9%, a difference of 8.3%), and in labor force | age > 16 (57.8% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 7.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (79.3% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 3.2%), in labor force | age 45-54 (76.3% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 3.6%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (70.3% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 6.0%).
Labor Participation Metric | Yuman | Chickasaw |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 57.8% | Tragic 62.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 71.7% | Tragic 76.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Tragic 27.7% | Exceptional 38.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Tragic 70.3% | Poor 74.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 79.3% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 77.1% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 74.7% | Tragic 80.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 76.3% | Tragic 79.0% |
Yuman vs Chickasaw Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Yuman and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (9.6% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 36.8%), births to unmarried women (44.4% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 22.3%), and single father households (3.3% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 19.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (29.5% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 4.5%), married-couple households (43.3% compared to 45.9%, a difference of 6.0%), and family households (69.3% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 7.6%).
Family Structure Metric | Yuman | Chickasaw |
Family Households | Exceptional 69.3% | Good 64.4% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 29.5% | Exceptional 28.2% |
Married-couple Households | Tragic 43.3% | Fair 45.9% |
Average Family Size | Exceptional 3.47 | Tragic 3.19 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 3.3% | Tragic 2.8% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 9.6% | Tragic 7.0% |
Currently Married | Tragic 42.6% | Average 46.6% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 12.6% | Tragic 14.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 44.4% | Tragic 36.3% |
Yuman vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Yuman and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (14.9% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 89.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.5% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 14.8%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (51.7% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 14.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (85.5% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 8.0%), 3 or more vehicles in household (19.9% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 11.5%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (51.7% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 14.0%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Yuman | Chickasaw |
No Vehicles Available | Tragic 14.9% | Exceptional 7.9% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 85.5% | Exceptional 92.3% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 51.7% | Exceptional 59.0% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Good 19.9% | Exceptional 22.2% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Good 6.5% | Exceptional 7.4% |
Yuman vs Chickasaw Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Yuman and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.5% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 46.7%), bachelor's degree (24.5% compared to 30.4%, a difference of 23.9%), and master's degree (9.2% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 23.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.9% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.49%), 1st grade (97.8% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.52%), and kindergarten (97.9% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.53%).
Education Level Metric | Yuman | Chickasaw |
No Schooling Completed | Tragic 2.5% | 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 | Tragic 97.6% | Exceptional 98.2% |
4th Grade | Tragic 97.2% | Exceptional 98.0% |
5th Grade | Tragic 97.0% | Exceptional 97.9% |
6th Grade | Tragic 96.7% | Exceptional 97.6% |
7th Grade | Tragic 95.2% | Exceptional 96.7% |
8th Grade | Tragic 94.9% | Exceptional 96.4% |
9th Grade | Tragic 93.8% | Exceptional 95.5% |
10th Grade | Tragic 92.0% | Excellent 94.1% |
11th Grade | Tragic 89.7% | Fair 92.3% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 86.5% | Tragic 90.3% |
High School Diploma | Tragic 84.0% | Poor 88.4% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 79.2% | Tragic 83.8% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 55.1% | Tragic 60.4% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 48.7% | Tragic 53.3% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 31.3% | Tragic 38.6% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 24.5% | Tragic 30.4% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 9.2% | Tragic 11.4% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.3% | Tragic 3.4% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.5% | Tragic 1.5% |
Yuman vs Chickasaw Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Yuman and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (0.95% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 83.9%), hearing disability (3.4% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 32.6%), and disability age 5 to 17 (5.4% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 26.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ambulatory disability (7.9% compared to 8.0%, a difference of 1.1%), disability age 35 to 64 (15.8% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 1.9%), and cognitive disability (18.1% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 2.3%).
Disability Metric | Yuman | Chickasaw |
Disability | Tragic 14.6% | Tragic 15.2% |
Males | Tragic 14.7% | Tragic 15.1% |
Females | Tragic 14.5% | Tragic 15.2% |
Age | Under 5 years | Exceptional 0.95% | Tragic 1.7% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Exceptional 5.4% | Tragic 6.8% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 10.6% | Tragic 9.0% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 15.8% | Tragic 16.1% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 31.5% | Tragic 30.2% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 54.4% | Tragic 51.2% |
Vision | Tragic 3.0% | Tragic 3.2% |
Hearing | Tragic 3.4% | Tragic 4.5% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.1% | Tragic 18.5% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 7.9% | Tragic 8.0% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.6% | Tragic 2.9% |