Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chickasaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania 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 EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Immigrants from Romania
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
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Chickasaw

Immigrants from Romania

Fair
Exceptional
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,314
SOCIAL INDEX
90.6/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
21st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Immigrants from Romania Integration in Chickasaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 101,762,545 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Romania within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.549. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.192% in Immigrants from Romania. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 192.4 Immigrants from Romania.
Chickasaw Integration in Immigrants from Romania Communities

Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Romania communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($36,475 compared to $49,463, a difference of 35.6%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $110,633, a difference of 34.6%), and median household income ($70,005 compared to $94,222, a difference of 34.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 27.0%, a difference of 0.51%), householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $64,462, a difference of 20.0%), and householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $55,522, a difference of 24.0%).
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Income
Income MetricChickasawImmigrants from Romania
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$36,475
Exceptional
$49,463
Median Family Income
Tragic
$85,356
Exceptional
$113,434
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,005
Exceptional
$94,222
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,672
Exceptional
$51,337
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,832
Exceptional
$61,040
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,414
Exceptional
$42,718
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$44,763
Exceptional
$55,522
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$77,929
Exceptional
$104,713
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,193
Exceptional
$110,633
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,732
Exceptional
$64,462
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.2%
Tragic
27.0%

Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Romania communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (21.8% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 44.0%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (17.0% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 40.6%), and single female poverty (26.3% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 39.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 2.6%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 3.8%), and single father poverty (19.0% compared to 15.5%, a difference of 22.1%).
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Poverty
Poverty MetricChickasawImmigrants from Romania
Poverty
Tragic
14.7%
Exceptional
11.0%
Families
Tragic
10.8%
Exceptional
7.8%
Males
Tragic
13.5%
Exceptional
9.9%
Females
Tragic
15.9%
Exceptional
12.0%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.5%
Exceptional
18.0%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
17.0%
Exceptional
12.1%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Exceptional
15.2%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
19.5%
Exceptional
14.2%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
19.8%
Exceptional
14.5%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
19.6%
Exceptional
14.3%
Single Males
Tragic
16.3%
Exceptional
11.7%
Single Females
Tragic
26.3%
Exceptional
18.8%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.0%
Exceptional
15.5%
Single Mothers
Tragic
34.4%
Exceptional
27.2%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.8%
Exceptional
4.7%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Exceptional
10.3%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Good
11.9%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.1%
Exceptional
10.0%

Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Romania communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 26.2%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 18.8%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 16.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment (5.0% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 0.070%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 0.080%), and female unemployment (5.1% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.63%).
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChickasawImmigrants from Romania
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
5.0%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Exceptional
5.1%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Excellent
5.1%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Good
11.5%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Average
17.5%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Good
10.2%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Fair
6.7%
Exceptional
6.3%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.2%
Exceptional
5.2%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
4.9%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Good
4.8%
Excellent
4.7%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Good
5.3%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.4%
Good
5.1%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.3%
Excellent
8.5%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.0%
Exceptional
7.1%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Exceptional
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.4%
Excellent
5.3%

Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Romania communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 5.7%), in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 83.3%, a difference of 5.3%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 80.2%, a difference of 5.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 75.2%, a difference of 1.0%), in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 3.9%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 3.9%).
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChickasawImmigrants from Romania
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
62.3%
Excellent
65.5%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.2%
Exceptional
80.2%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.3%
Fair
36.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Good
75.2%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.9%
Exceptional
85.1%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.9%
Exceptional
85.1%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.9%
Exceptional
84.8%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
79.0%
Exceptional
83.3%

Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Romania communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 33.4%), births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 30.2%), and single mother households (7.0% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 27.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.19 compared to 3.18, a difference of 0.23%), family households (64.4% compared to 64.6%, a difference of 0.25%), and family households with children (28.2% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 3.2%).
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChickasawImmigrants from Romania
Family Households
Good
64.4%
Good
64.6%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.2%
Fair
27.4%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Exceptional
48.3%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Tragic
3.18
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.8%
Exceptional
2.1%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Exceptional
5.5%
Currently Married
Average
46.6%
Exceptional
48.4%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.2%
Exceptional
11.5%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.3%
Exceptional
27.9%

Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Romania communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 45.3%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 23.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 18.9%, a difference of 17.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 88.7%, a difference of 4.0%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 54.7%, a difference of 7.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 18.9%, a difference of 17.8%).
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChickasawImmigrants from Romania
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Tragic
11.4%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Tragic
88.7%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.0%
Fair
54.7%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.2%
Poor
18.9%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Poor
6.0%

Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Romania communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 59.9%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 54.7%), and bachelor's degree (30.4% compared to 42.9%, a difference of 41.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 9th grade (95.5% compared to 95.4%, a difference of 0.060%), nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.1%, a difference of 0.26%), and kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.1%, a difference of 0.27%).
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Education Level
Education Level MetricChickasawImmigrants from Romania
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Exceptional
1.9%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Excellent
98.1%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Excellent
98.1%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Excellent
98.1%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Excellent
98.0%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Excellent
97.9%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Exceptional
97.7%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Exceptional
97.6%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Exceptional
97.3%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Exceptional
96.4%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Exceptional
96.2%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Exceptional
95.4%
10th Grade
Excellent
94.1%
Exceptional
94.5%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Exceptional
93.5%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Exceptional
92.3%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.4%
Exceptional
90.4%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.8%
Exceptional
87.5%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
60.4%
Exceptional
68.9%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.3%
Exceptional
63.3%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
38.6%
Exceptional
50.9%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
30.4%
Exceptional
42.9%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.4%
Exceptional
17.7%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Exceptional
5.4%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Exceptional
2.1%

Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Romania communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 61.2%), vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 58.5%), and hearing disability (4.5% compared to 3.0%, a difference of 49.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 46.0%, a difference of 11.3%), cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 12.8%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 18.9%).
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Romania Disability
Disability MetricChickasawImmigrants from Romania
Disability
Tragic
15.2%
Exceptional
11.2%
Males
Tragic
15.1%
Exceptional
10.7%
Females
Tragic
15.2%
Exceptional
11.6%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.7%
Excellent
1.2%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.8%
Exceptional
5.2%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Exceptional
6.3%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Exceptional
10.0%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Exceptional
21.5%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.2%
Exceptional
46.0%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Average
3.0%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.5%
Exceptional
16.4%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.0%
Exceptional
5.8%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Excellent
2.4%