Pima vs Chippewa Community Comparison
COMPARE
Pima
Chippewa
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Pima
Chippewa
1,700
SOCIAL INDEX
14.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
291st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,429
SOCIAL INDEX
21.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
259th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Chippewa Integration in Pima Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 51,408,680 people shows a perfect positive correlation between the proportion of Chippewa within Pima communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.993. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Pima within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.011% in Chippewa. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Pima corresponds to an increase of 11.4 Chippewa.
Pima vs Chippewa Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Pima and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($30,644 compared to $36,631, a difference of 19.5%), wage/income gap (21.1% compared to 25.0%, a difference of 18.3%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($73,365 compared to $83,943, a difference of 14.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median female earnings ($35,326 compared to $35,003, a difference of 0.92%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($82,821 compared to $80,005, a difference of 3.5%), and median earnings ($38,285 compared to $40,287, a difference of 5.2%).
Income Metric | Pima | Chippewa |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $30,644 | Tragic $36,631 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $77,431 | Tragic $86,852 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $63,262 | Tragic $70,539 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $38,285 | Tragic $40,287 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $42,357 | Tragic $46,368 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $35,326 | Tragic $35,003 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Poor $51,503 | Tragic $47,015 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $82,821 | Tragic $80,005 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $73,365 | Tragic $83,943 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $50,539 | Tragic $53,847 |
Wage/Income Gap | Exceptional 21.1% | Excellent 25.0% |
Pima vs Chippewa Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Pima and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (11.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 109.7%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (23.9% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 82.9%), and family poverty (18.4% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 63.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (28.4% compared to 25.9%, a difference of 9.6%), single mother poverty (38.6% compared to 34.8%, a difference of 11.0%), and single female poverty (30.3% compared to 26.8%, a difference of 13.1%).
Poverty Metric | Pima | Chippewa |
Poverty | Tragic 21.9% | Tragic 15.7% |
Families | Tragic 18.4% | Tragic 11.2% |
Males | Tragic 20.4% | Tragic 14.6% |
Females | Tragic 23.6% | Tragic 16.7% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 28.4% | Tragic 25.9% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 25.3% | Tragic 18.0% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 27.4% | Tragic 23.4% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 29.0% | Tragic 20.5% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 29.7% | Tragic 21.0% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 28.2% | Tragic 20.6% |
Single Males | Tragic 20.2% | Tragic 16.4% |
Single Females | Tragic 30.3% | Tragic 26.8% |
Single Fathers | Exceptional 14.8% | Tragic 18.8% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 38.6% | Tragic 34.8% |
Married Couples | Tragic 11.4% | Poor 5.4% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Tragic 19.8% | Tragic 12.1% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Tragic 23.9% | Tragic 13.1% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 19.0% | Tragic 14.7% |
Pima vs Chippewa Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Pima and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (11.8% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 88.8%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (18.9% compared to 11.1%, a difference of 70.3%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (11.7% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 66.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 6 years (13.4% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 0.79%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.8% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 3.0%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.2% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 9.6%).
Unemployment Metric | Pima | Chippewa |
Unemployment | Tragic 8.2% | Tragic 6.2% |
Males | Tragic 8.3% | Tragic 6.6% |
Females | Tragic 9.3% | Tragic 6.1% |
Youth < 25 | Tragic 16.2% | Tragic 13.5% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Tragic 23.1% | Poor 18.0% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Tragic 14.2% | Tragic 12.3% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Tragic 11.8% | Tragic 7.8% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 9.6% | Tragic 7.8% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 11.8% | Tragic 6.2% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Tragic 6.4% | Tragic 5.5% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Tragic 6.6% | Tragic 5.9% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Excellent 4.8% | Poor 4.9% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 6.6% | Tragic 5.7% |
Seniors > 65 | Tragic 6.3% | Tragic 5.4% |
Seniors > 75 | Tragic 9.2% | Tragic 10.1% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 13.4% | Tragic 13.3% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Tragic 18.9% | Tragic 11.1% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Tragic 11.7% | Tragic 7.0% |
Pima vs Chippewa Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Pima and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (34.1% compared to 43.8%, a difference of 28.5%), in labor force | age 20-64 (69.0% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 12.0%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (69.0% compared to 77.1%, a difference of 11.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (79.0% compared to 82.6%, a difference of 4.5%), in labor force | age > 16 (57.4% compared to 63.1%, a difference of 9.9%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (74.8% compared to 82.9%, a difference of 10.8%).
Labor Participation Metric | Pima | Chippewa |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 57.4% | Tragic 63.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 69.0% | Tragic 77.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Tragic 34.1% | Exceptional 43.8% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Tragic 69.0% | Exceptional 77.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 74.3% | Tragic 82.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 79.0% | Tragic 82.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 74.8% | Tragic 82.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 72.8% | Tragic 81.3% |
Pima vs Chippewa Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Pima and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in single father households (4.2% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 35.1%), births to unmarried women (51.5% compared to 42.6%, a difference of 20.7%), and currently married (35.9% compared to 43.2%, a difference of 20.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.1% compared to 26.7%, a difference of 1.4%), divorced or separated (12.9% compared to 13.2%, a difference of 2.2%), and single mother households (8.3% compared to 8.0%, a difference of 3.8%).
Family Structure Metric | Pima | Chippewa |
Family Households | Exceptional 65.9% | Tragic 62.1% |
Family Households with Children | Tragic 27.1% | Tragic 26.7% |
Married-couple Households | Tragic 35.6% | Tragic 42.1% |
Average Family Size | Exceptional 3.75 | Poor 3.20 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 4.2% | Tragic 3.1% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 8.3% | Tragic 8.0% |
Currently Married | Tragic 35.9% | Tragic 43.2% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 12.9% | Tragic 13.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 51.5% | Tragic 42.6% |
Pima vs Chippewa Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Pima and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 49.6%), 2 or more vehicles in household (52.0% compared to 57.2%, a difference of 10.0%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (86.3% compared to 90.7%, a difference of 5.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3 or more vehicles in household (22.0% compared to 21.5%, a difference of 2.4%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 3.9%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (86.3% compared to 90.7%, a difference of 5.1%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Pima | Chippewa |
No Vehicles Available | Tragic 14.1% | Exceptional 9.4% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 86.3% | Exceptional 90.7% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 52.0% | Exceptional 57.2% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.0% | Exceptional 21.5% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Exceptional 7.6% |
Pima vs Chippewa Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Pima and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in associate's degree (30.2% compared to 40.7%, a difference of 34.8%), bachelor's degree (23.2% compared to 30.6%, a difference of 31.7%), and no schooling completed (2.1% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 29.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of kindergarten (98.2% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.28%), 1st grade (98.2% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.28%), and nursery school (98.2% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.29%).
Education Level Metric | Pima | Chippewa |
No Schooling Completed | Average 2.1% | Exceptional 1.6% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.5% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.5% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.5% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.4% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Exceptional 98.4% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 97.7% | Exceptional 98.2% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Exceptional 98.1% |
6th Grade | Excellent 97.2% | Exceptional 97.9% |
7th Grade | Good 96.1% | Exceptional 97.3% |
8th Grade | Fair 95.6% | Exceptional 97.1% |
9th Grade | Tragic 93.9% | Exceptional 96.1% |
10th Grade | Tragic 91.2% | Exceptional 95.0% |
11th Grade | Tragic 88.3% | Exceptional 93.5% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 84.6% | Good 91.5% |
High School Diploma | Tragic 81.6% | Excellent 89.7% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 76.4% | Fair 85.2% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 51.4% | Tragic 62.6% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 45.6% | Tragic 55.7% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 30.2% | Tragic 40.7% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 23.2% | Tragic 30.6% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 9.2% | Tragic 11.4% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.3% | Tragic 3.5% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.3% | Tragic 1.5% |
Pima vs Chippewa Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Pima and Chippewa communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.9%, a difference of 77.1%), disability age 65 to 74 (38.6% compared to 27.8%, a difference of 38.9%), and vision disability (3.3% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 36.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability (13.7% compared to 14.1%, a difference of 3.2%), cognitive disability (18.8% compared to 18.1%, a difference of 3.9%), and self-care disability (2.8% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 5.2%).
Disability Metric | Pima | Chippewa |
Disability | Tragic 13.7% | Tragic 14.1% |
Males | Tragic 12.8% | Tragic 14.3% |
Females | Tragic 14.8% | Tragic 14.0% |
Age | Under 5 years | Exceptional 1.1% | Tragic 1.9% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.2% | Tragic 7.1% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 7.7% | Tragic 9.0% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Tragic 15.0% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 38.6% | Tragic 27.8% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 55.8% | Tragic 48.4% |
Vision | Tragic 3.3% | Tragic 2.4% |
Hearing | Tragic 3.7% | Tragic 4.0% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.8% | Tragic 18.1% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.2% | Tragic 7.1% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.8% | Tragic 2.6% |