Chickasaw vs Navajo Community Comparison
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Navajo
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Chickasaw
Navajo
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
1,296
SOCIAL INDEX
10.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
316th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Navajo Integration in Chickasaw Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 109,168,946 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Navajo within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.634. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.046% in Navajo. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 45.7 Navajo.
Chickasaw vs Navajo Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($36,475 compared to $29,031, a difference of 25.6%), wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 22.4%, a difference of 21.5%), and median family income ($85,356 compared to $70,989, a difference of 20.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median female earnings ($34,414 compared to $33,046, a difference of 4.1%), householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $42,380, a difference of 5.6%), and median earnings ($40,672 compared to $36,999, a difference of 9.9%).
Income Metric | Chickasaw | Navajo |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $36,475 | Tragic $29,031 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $85,356 | Tragic $70,989 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $70,005 | Tragic $59,159 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $40,672 | Tragic $36,999 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $47,832 | Tragic $42,098 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $34,414 | Tragic $33,046 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Tragic $44,763 | Tragic $42,380 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $77,929 | Tragic $66,529 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $82,193 | Tragic $69,759 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $53,732 | Tragic $47,722 |
Wage/Income Gap | Tragic 27.2% | Exceptional 22.4% |
Chickasaw vs Navajo Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 104.7%), family poverty (10.8% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 73.4%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 19.4%, a difference of 66.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother poverty (34.4% compared to 40.2%, a difference of 16.8%), single female poverty (26.3% compared to 31.7%, a difference of 20.5%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (24.5% compared to 30.3%, a difference of 23.8%).
Poverty Metric | Chickasaw | Navajo |
Poverty | Tragic 14.7% | Tragic 23.1% |
Families | Tragic 10.8% | Tragic 18.8% |
Males | Tragic 13.5% | Tragic 22.3% |
Females | Tragic 15.9% | Tragic 23.9% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 24.5% | Tragic 30.3% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 17.0% | Tragic 23.3% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 21.8% | Tragic 31.6% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 19.5% | Tragic 30.2% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 19.8% | Tragic 30.3% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 19.6% | Tragic 30.5% |
Single Males | Tragic 16.3% | Tragic 25.3% |
Single Females | Tragic 26.3% | Tragic 31.7% |
Single Fathers | Tragic 19.0% | Tragic 29.2% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 34.4% | Tragic 40.2% |
Married Couples | Tragic 5.8% | Tragic 11.9% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Good 10.7% | Tragic 17.5% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Exceptional 11.6% | Tragic 19.4% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 13.1% | Tragic 21.1% |
Chickasaw vs Navajo Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in male unemployment (5.2% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 90.0%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.9% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 89.7%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.7% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 80.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 23.4%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 40.4%), and female unemployment (5.1% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 42.0%).
Unemployment Metric | Chickasaw | Navajo |
Unemployment | Exceptional 5.0% | Tragic 8.4% |
Males | Excellent 5.2% | Tragic 9.8% |
Females | Excellent 5.1% | Tragic 7.3% |
Youth < 25 | Exceptional 11.2% | Tragic 18.6% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Exceptional 16.7% | Tragic 29.0% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Exceptional 9.9% | Tragic 16.1% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Fair 6.7% | Tragic 12.2% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 6.2% | Tragic 10.6% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 4.9% | Tragic 9.3% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Exceptional 4.2% | Tragic 6.7% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Good 4.8% | Tragic 6.7% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Exceptional 4.3% | Tragic 6.3% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 4.7% | Tragic 6.9% |
Seniors > 65 | Exceptional 4.4% | Tragic 6.7% |
Seniors > 75 | Exceptional 7.3% | Tragic 9.1% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 9.0% | Tragic 13.5% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Exceptional 8.6% | Tragic 14.2% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Good 5.4% | Tragic 8.2% |
Chickasaw vs Navajo Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 32.1%, a difference of 19.5%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 14.8%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 73.8%, a difference of 11.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 72.8%, a difference of 8.6%), in labor force | age 35-44 (80.9% compared to 73.8%, a difference of 9.6%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 74.6%, a difference of 9.7%).
Labor Participation Metric | Chickasaw | Navajo |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 62.3% | Tragic 56.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 76.2% | Tragic 69.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Exceptional 38.3% | Tragic 32.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Poor 74.5% | Tragic 64.8% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 81.9% | Tragic 74.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 81.9% | Tragic 73.8% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 80.9% | Tragic 73.8% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 79.0% | Tragic 72.8% |
Chickasaw vs Navajo Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 41.9%), single mother households (7.0% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 25.6%), and currently married (46.6% compared to 39.0%, a difference of 19.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 66.4%, a difference of 3.1%), family households with children (28.2% compared to 26.9%, a difference of 4.8%), and average family size (3.19 compared to 3.65, a difference of 14.3%).
Family Structure Metric | Chickasaw | Navajo |
Family Households | Good 64.4% | Exceptional 66.4% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 28.2% | Tragic 26.9% |
Married-couple Households | Fair 45.9% | Tragic 40.1% |
Average Family Size | Tragic 3.19 | Exceptional 3.65 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 2.8% | Tragic 3.2% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 7.0% | Tragic 8.8% |
Currently Married | Average 46.6% | Tragic 39.0% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 14.2% | Good 12.0% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 36.3% | Tragic 51.5% |
Chickasaw vs Navajo Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 19.9%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 10.6%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 55.3%, a difference of 6.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 22.3%, a difference of 0.45%), 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 90.8%, a difference of 1.6%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 55.3%, a difference of 6.6%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Chickasaw | Navajo |
No Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Exceptional 9.4% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 92.3% | Exceptional 90.8% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 59.0% | Average 55.3% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.2% | Exceptional 22.3% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.4% | Exceptional 8.2% |
Chickasaw vs Navajo Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in bachelor's degree (30.4% compared to 23.6%, a difference of 28.7%), no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 25.7%), and master's degree (11.4% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 21.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.41%), kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.41%), and 1st grade (98.3% compared to 97.9%, a difference of 0.41%).
Education Level Metric | Chickasaw | Navajo |
No Schooling Completed | Exceptional 1.7% | Fair 2.1% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.4% | Average 98.0% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.4% | Average 98.0% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Average 97.9% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Average 97.9% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Average 97.8% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Fair 97.4% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.9% | Fair 97.2% |
6th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Tragic 96.8% |
7th Grade | Exceptional 96.7% | Poor 95.8% |
8th Grade | Exceptional 96.4% | Tragic 95.3% |
9th Grade | Exceptional 95.5% | Tragic 93.9% |
10th Grade | Excellent 94.1% | Tragic 92.3% |
11th Grade | Fair 92.3% | Tragic 90.0% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 90.3% | Tragic 87.1% |
High School Diploma | Poor 88.4% | Tragic 85.2% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 83.8% | Tragic 81.5% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 60.4% | Tragic 56.3% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 53.3% | Tragic 50.8% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 38.6% | Tragic 32.6% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 30.4% | Tragic 23.6% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 11.4% | Tragic 9.4% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.4% | Tragic 2.9% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.5% | Tragic 1.4% |
Chickasaw vs Navajo Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Navajo communities in the United States are seen in disability age 5 to 17 (6.8% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 25.7%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 58.3%, a difference of 13.8%), and disability age 18 to 34 (9.0% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 10.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 0.15%), vision disability (3.2% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 1.1%), and cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 1.4%).
Disability Metric | Chickasaw | Navajo |
Disability | Tragic 15.2% | Tragic 14.3% |
Males | Tragic 15.1% | Tragic 14.4% |
Females | Tragic 15.2% | Tragic 14.2% |
Age | Under 5 years | Tragic 1.7% | Tragic 1.6% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.8% | Exceptional 5.4% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 9.0% | Tragic 8.1% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Tragic 15.5% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 30.2% | Tragic 33.3% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 51.2% | Tragic 58.3% |
Vision | Tragic 3.2% | Tragic 3.1% |
Hearing | Tragic 4.5% | Tragic 4.6% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.5% | Tragic 18.8% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.0% | Tragic 7.5% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.9% | Tragic 2.9% |