Chickasaw vs Zimbabwean Community Comparison
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Zimbabwean
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Chickasaw
Zimbabweans
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,358
SOCIAL INDEX
91.0/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
18th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Zimbabwean Integration in Chickasaw Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 48,391,058 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Zimbabweans within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.016. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.004% in Zimbabweans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to a decrease of 4.2 Zimbabweans.
Chickasaw vs Zimbabwean Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $106,849, a difference of 30.0%), median household income ($70,005 compared to $90,618, a difference of 29.4%), and median family income ($85,356 compared to $110,011, a difference of 28.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 3.2%), householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $51,259, a difference of 14.5%), and median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $56,302, a difference of 17.7%).
Income Metric | Chickasaw | Zimbabwean |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $36,475 | Exceptional $45,804 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $85,356 | Exceptional $110,011 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $70,005 | Exceptional $90,618 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $40,672 | Exceptional $48,229 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $47,832 | Excellent $56,302 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $34,414 | Exceptional $40,798 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Tragic $44,763 | Tragic $51,259 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $77,929 | Exceptional $98,586 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $82,193 | Exceptional $106,849 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $53,732 | Exceptional $65,854 |
Wage/Income Gap | Tragic 27.2% | Fair 26.3% |
Chickasaw vs Zimbabwean Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (17.0% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 45.9%), child poverty under the age of 5 (21.8% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 43.7%), and married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 4.1%, a difference of 41.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 4.3%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 11.2%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (24.5% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 19.8%).
Poverty Metric | Chickasaw | Zimbabwean |
Poverty | Tragic 14.7% | Exceptional 11.3% |
Families | Tragic 10.8% | Exceptional 7.8% |
Males | Tragic 13.5% | Exceptional 10.2% |
Females | Tragic 15.9% | Exceptional 12.3% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 24.5% | Fair 20.4% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 17.0% | Exceptional 11.7% |
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 14.3% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 19.6% | Exceptional 14.4% |
Single Males | Tragic 16.3% | Poor 13.1% |
Single Females | Tragic 26.3% | Exceptional 19.5% |
Single Fathers | Tragic 19.0% | Exceptional 15.6% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 34.4% | Exceptional 27.9% |
Married Couples | Tragic 5.8% | Exceptional 4.1% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Good 10.7% | Exceptional 9.6% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Exceptional 11.6% | Exceptional 11.2% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 13.1% | Exceptional 9.5% |
Chickasaw vs Zimbabwean Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.2% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 28.3%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 26.2%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (4.7% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 26.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 0.52%), unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.2% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 0.95%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.3% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 3.4%).
Unemployment Metric | Chickasaw | Zimbabwean |
Unemployment | Exceptional 5.0% | Exceptional 4.8% |
Males | Excellent 5.2% | Exceptional 4.8% |
Females | Excellent 5.1% | Exceptional 4.8% |
Youth < 25 | Exceptional 11.2% | Exceptional 10.2% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Exceptional 16.7% | Exceptional 15.4% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Exceptional 9.9% | Exceptional 9.2% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Fair 6.7% | Exceptional 6.4% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 6.2% | Exceptional 4.8% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 4.9% | Exceptional 4.3% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Exceptional 4.2% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Good 4.8% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Exceptional 4.3% | Exceptional 4.5% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 4.7% | Tragic 5.9% |
Seniors > 65 | Exceptional 4.4% | Tragic 5.6% |
Seniors > 75 | Exceptional 7.3% | Average 8.7% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 9.0% | Exceptional 7.3% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Exceptional 8.6% | Exceptional 8.6% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Good 5.4% | Exceptional 5.1% |
Chickasaw vs Zimbabwean Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 67.3%, a difference of 8.0%), in labor force | age 35-44 (80.9% compared to 86.1%, a difference of 6.4%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 84.0%, a difference of 6.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 38.7%, a difference of 1.0%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 75.6%, a difference of 1.5%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 84.5%, a difference of 3.2%).
Labor Participation Metric | Chickasaw | Zimbabwean |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 62.3% | Exceptional 67.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 76.2% | Exceptional 81.0% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Exceptional 38.3% | Exceptional 38.7% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Poor 74.5% | Excellent 75.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 81.9% | Fair 84.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 81.9% | Exceptional 85.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 80.9% | Exceptional 86.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 79.0% | Exceptional 84.0% |
Chickasaw vs Zimbabwean Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 28.7%, a difference of 26.5%), single father households (2.8% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 24.5%), and divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 22.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.19 compared to 3.20, a difference of 0.38%), family households (64.4% compared to 64.1%, a difference of 0.53%), and currently married (46.6% compared to 47.0%, a difference of 0.86%).
Family Structure Metric | Chickasaw | Zimbabwean |
Family Households | Good 64.4% | Fair 64.1% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 28.2% | Exceptional 27.9% |
Married-couple Households | Fair 45.9% | Excellent 47.4% |
Average Family Size | Tragic 3.19 | Poor 3.20 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 2.8% | Exceptional 2.2% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 7.0% | Excellent 6.1% |
Currently Married | Average 46.6% | Good 47.0% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 14.2% | Exceptional 11.6% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 36.3% | Exceptional 28.7% |
Chickasaw vs Zimbabwean Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 15.5%), no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 15.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 20.3%, a difference of 9.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 91.0%, a difference of 1.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 57.2%, a difference of 3.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 20.3%, a difference of 9.6%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Chickasaw | Zimbabwean |
No Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Exceptional 9.0% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 92.3% | Exceptional 91.0% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 59.0% | Exceptional 57.2% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.2% | Excellent 20.3% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.4% | Good 6.4% |
Chickasaw vs Zimbabwean Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (11.4% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 55.2%), professional degree (3.4% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 54.6%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 50.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 6th grade (97.6% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.050%), 5th grade (97.9% compared to 97.8%, a difference of 0.060%), and 7th grade (96.7% compared to 96.8%, a difference of 0.060%).
Education Level Metric | Chickasaw | Zimbabwean |
No Schooling Completed | Exceptional 1.7% | Exceptional 1.7% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.4% | Exceptional 98.3% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.4% | Exceptional 98.3% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Exceptional 98.3% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Exceptional 98.2% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.1% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Exceptional 97.9% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.9% | Exceptional 97.8% |
6th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Exceptional 97.6% |
7th Grade | Exceptional 96.7% | Exceptional 96.8% |
8th Grade | Exceptional 96.4% | Exceptional 96.5% |
9th Grade | Exceptional 95.5% | Exceptional 95.9% |
10th Grade | Excellent 94.1% | Exceptional 94.9% |
11th Grade | Fair 92.3% | Exceptional 93.9% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 90.3% | Exceptional 92.7% |
High School Diploma | Poor 88.4% | Exceptional 91.1% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 83.8% | Exceptional 88.0% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 60.4% | Exceptional 69.9% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 53.3% | Exceptional 64.2% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 38.6% | Exceptional 51.3% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 30.4% | Exceptional 43.3% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 11.4% | Exceptional 17.7% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.4% | Exceptional 5.2% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.5% | Exceptional 2.3% |
Chickasaw vs Zimbabwean Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 62.0%), hearing disability (4.5% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 57.6%), and disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 54.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 5.0%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 48.1%, a difference of 6.5%), and disability age 5 to 17 (6.8% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 23.2%).
Disability Metric | Chickasaw | Zimbabwean |
Disability | Tragic 15.2% | Exceptional 10.9% |
Males | Tragic 15.1% | Exceptional 10.6% |
Females | Tragic 15.2% | Exceptional 11.3% |
Age | Under 5 years | Tragic 1.7% | Exceptional 1.2% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.8% | Good 5.5% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 9.0% | Good 6.5% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Exceptional 10.4% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 30.2% | Exceptional 21.5% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 51.2% | Tragic 48.1% |
Vision | Tragic 3.2% | Exceptional 2.0% |
Hearing | Tragic 4.5% | Excellent 2.8% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.5% | Tragic 17.6% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.0% | Exceptional 5.4% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.9% | Exceptional 2.2% |