Pima vs Iroquois Community Comparison
COMPARE
Pima
Iroquois
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Pima
Iroquois
1,700
SOCIAL INDEX
14.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
291st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,526
SOCIAL INDEX
22.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
253rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Iroquois Integration in Pima Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 48,506,568 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Iroquois within Pima communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.660. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Pima within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.021% in Iroquois. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Pima corresponds to an increase of 20.7 Iroquois.
Pima vs Iroquois Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Pima and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($30,644 compared to $39,104, a difference of 27.6%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($73,365 compared to $87,255, a difference of 18.9%), and wage/income gap (21.1% compared to 25.1%, a difference of 18.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($82,821 compared to $83,682, a difference of 1.0%), median female earnings ($35,326 compared to $36,408, a difference of 3.1%), and householder income over 65 years ($50,539 compared to $53,737, a difference of 6.3%).
Income Metric | Pima | Iroquois |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $30,644 | Tragic $39,104 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $77,431 | Tragic $90,543 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $63,262 | Tragic $74,279 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $38,285 | Tragic $42,430 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $42,357 | Tragic $49,374 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $35,326 | Tragic $36,408 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Poor $51,503 | Tragic $47,380 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $82,821 | Tragic $83,682 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $73,365 | Tragic $87,255 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $50,539 | Tragic $53,737 |
Wage/Income Gap | Exceptional 21.1% | Excellent 25.1% |
Pima vs Iroquois Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Pima and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (11.4% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 107.2%), family poverty (18.4% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 71.3%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (23.9% compared to 14.0%, a difference of 70.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother poverty (38.6% compared to 34.8%, a difference of 10.8%), single female poverty (30.3% compared to 25.7%, a difference of 17.8%), and single father poverty (14.8% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 20.1%).
Poverty Metric | Pima | Iroquois |
Poverty | Tragic 21.9% | Tragic 14.5% |
Families | Tragic 18.4% | Tragic 10.7% |
Males | Tragic 20.4% | Tragic 13.2% |
Females | Tragic 23.6% | Tragic 15.8% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 28.4% | Tragic 22.9% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 25.3% | Tragic 17.5% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 27.4% | Tragic 22.0% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 29.0% | Tragic 19.9% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 29.7% | Tragic 19.6% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 28.2% | Tragic 20.4% |
Single Males | Tragic 20.2% | Tragic 14.5% |
Single Females | Tragic 30.3% | Tragic 25.7% |
Single Fathers | Exceptional 14.8% | Tragic 17.7% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 38.6% | Tragic 34.8% |
Married Couples | Tragic 11.4% | Poor 5.5% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Tragic 19.8% | Tragic 11.9% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Tragic 23.9% | Tragic 14.0% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 19.0% | Tragic 13.5% |
Pima vs Iroquois Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Pima and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (11.8% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 132.6%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (11.7% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 105.0%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (18.9% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 104.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.2% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 1.3%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.8% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 2.7%), and unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (6.4% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 25.8%).
Unemployment Metric | Pima | Iroquois |
Unemployment | Tragic 8.2% | Poor 5.4% |
Males | Tragic 8.3% | Tragic 5.7% |
Females | Tragic 9.3% | Fair 5.4% |
Youth < 25 | Tragic 16.2% | Exceptional 11.3% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Tragic 23.1% | Average 17.6% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Tragic 14.2% | Exceptional 10.1% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Tragic 11.8% | Tragic 7.5% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 9.6% | Tragic 5.9% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 11.8% | Tragic 5.1% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Tragic 6.4% | Tragic 5.1% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Tragic 6.6% | Fair 4.9% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Excellent 4.8% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 6.6% | Exceptional 5.1% |
Seniors > 65 | Tragic 6.3% | Exceptional 4.9% |
Seniors > 75 | Tragic 9.2% | Tragic 9.3% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 13.4% | Tragic 8.7% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Tragic 18.9% | Tragic 9.2% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Tragic 11.7% | Tragic 5.7% |
Pima vs Iroquois Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Pima and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (34.1% compared to 39.9%, a difference of 17.2%), in labor force | age 25-29 (74.3% compared to 83.8%, a difference of 12.8%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (69.0% compared to 77.5%, a difference of 12.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (79.0% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 3.6%), in labor force | age 20-24 (69.0% compared to 75.6%, a difference of 9.6%), and in labor force | age > 16 (57.4% compared to 63.2%, a difference of 10.1%).
Labor Participation Metric | Pima | Iroquois |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 57.4% | Tragic 63.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 69.0% | Tragic 77.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Tragic 34.1% | Exceptional 39.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Tragic 69.0% | Excellent 75.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 74.3% | Tragic 83.8% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 79.0% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 74.8% | Tragic 83.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 72.8% | Tragic 80.6% |
Pima vs Iroquois Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Pima and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in single father households (4.2% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 60.4%), births to unmarried women (51.5% compared to 38.2%, a difference of 34.7%), and currently married (35.9% compared to 44.7%, a difference of 24.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of divorced or separated (12.9% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 0.14%), family households with children (27.1% compared to 26.1%, a difference of 4.0%), and family households (65.9% compared to 62.2%, a difference of 5.9%).
Family Structure Metric | Pima | Iroquois |
Family Households | Exceptional 65.9% | Tragic 62.2% |
Family Households with Children | Tragic 27.1% | Tragic 26.1% |
Married-couple Households | Tragic 35.6% | Tragic 43.7% |
Average Family Size | Exceptional 3.75 | Tragic 3.16 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 4.2% | Tragic 2.6% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 8.3% | Tragic 7.0% |
Currently Married | Tragic 35.9% | Tragic 44.7% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 12.9% | Tragic 12.9% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 51.5% | Tragic 38.2% |
Pima vs Iroquois Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Pima and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 29.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 21.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.0% compared to 19.4%, a difference of 13.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (86.3% compared to 89.2%, a difference of 3.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (52.0% compared to 54.7%, a difference of 5.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.0% compared to 19.4%, a difference of 13.3%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Pima | Iroquois |
No Vehicles Available | Tragic 14.1% | Poor 10.9% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 86.3% | Poor 89.2% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 52.0% | Fair 54.7% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.0% | Average 19.4% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Good 6.5% |
Pima vs Iroquois Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Pima and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in bachelor's degree (23.2% compared to 33.2%, a difference of 43.1%), associate's degree (30.2% compared to 42.8%, a difference of 41.7%), and master's degree (9.2% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 39.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3rd grade (98.0% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.050%), nursery school (98.2% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.060%), and 4th grade (97.7% compared to 97.8%, a difference of 0.060%).
Education Level Metric | Pima | Iroquois |
No Schooling Completed | Average 2.1% | Exceptional 1.9% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.2% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.2% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.1% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.1% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Exceptional 98.0% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 97.7% | Exceptional 97.8% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Exceptional 97.7% |
6th Grade | Excellent 97.2% | Exceptional 97.4% |
7th Grade | Good 96.1% | Exceptional 96.6% |
8th Grade | Fair 95.6% | Exceptional 96.3% |
9th Grade | Tragic 93.9% | Exceptional 95.4% |
10th Grade | Tragic 91.2% | Exceptional 94.3% |
11th Grade | Tragic 88.3% | Good 92.8% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 84.6% | Average 91.1% |
High School Diploma | Tragic 81.6% | Average 89.2% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 76.4% | Tragic 84.6% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 51.4% | Tragic 62.6% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 45.6% | Tragic 56.2% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 30.2% | Tragic 42.8% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 23.2% | Tragic 33.2% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 9.2% | Tragic 12.9% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.3% | Tragic 3.7% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.3% | Tragic 1.6% |
Pima vs Iroquois Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Pima and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in disability age 65 to 74 (38.6% compared to 25.4%, a difference of 51.7%), disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 37.1%), and vision disability (3.3% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 27.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of hearing disability (3.7% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 0.39%), disability (13.7% compared to 13.8%, a difference of 0.79%), and disability age 18 to 34 (7.7% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 2.2%).
Disability Metric | Pima | Iroquois |
Disability | Tragic 13.7% | Tragic 13.8% |
Males | Tragic 12.8% | Tragic 13.6% |
Females | Tragic 14.8% | Tragic 14.0% |
Age | Under 5 years | Exceptional 1.1% | Tragic 1.5% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.2% | Tragic 6.9% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 7.7% | Tragic 7.9% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Tragic 14.4% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 38.6% | Tragic 25.4% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 55.8% | Tragic 48.4% |
Vision | Tragic 3.3% | Tragic 2.6% |
Hearing | Tragic 3.7% | Tragic 3.7% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.8% | Tragic 18.2% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.2% | Tragic 7.1% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.8% | Tragic 2.7% |