Ute Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
COMPARE
Ute
Select to Compare
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Ute Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
21.8%
POVERTY | GIRLS < 16
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
315th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Ute Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 55,563,406 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Ute and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.294 and weighted average of 21.8%. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Ute within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.22% in poverty level among girls under the age of 16.
It is essential to understand that the correlation between the percentage of Ute and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 does not imply a direct cause-and-effect relationship. It remains uncertain whether the presence of Ute influences an upward or downward trend in the level of poverty level among girls under the age of 16 within an area, or if Ute simply ended up residing in those areas with higher or lower levels of poverty level among girls under the age of 16 due to other factors.
Demographics Similar to Ute by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Ute are Immigrants from Guatemala (21.9%, a difference of 0.27%), Arapaho (21.7%, a difference of 0.28%), Creek (21.7%, a difference of 0.29%), African (21.9%, a difference of 0.59%), and Immigrants from Mexico (21.6%, a difference of 0.80%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
| Houma | 0.0 /100 | #308 | Tragic 21.5% |
| Bahamians | 0.0 /100 | #309 | Tragic 21.5% |
| Immigrants from Somalia | 0.0 /100 | #310 | Tragic 21.6% |
| Dutch West Indians | 0.0 /100 | #311 | Tragic 21.6% |
| Immigrants from Mexico | 0.0 /100 | #312 | Tragic 21.6% |
| Creek | 0.0 /100 | #313 | Tragic 21.7% |
| Arapaho | 0.0 /100 | #314 | Tragic 21.7% |
| Ute | 0.0 /100 | #315 | Tragic 21.8% |
| Immigrants from Guatemala | 0.0 /100 | #316 | Tragic 21.9% |
| Africans | 0.0 /100 | #317 | Tragic 21.9% |
| Immigrants from Dominica | 0.0 /100 | #318 | Tragic 22.1% |
| U.S. Virgin Islanders | 0.0 /100 | #319 | Tragic 22.1% |
| Hondurans | 0.0 /100 | #320 | Tragic 22.2% |
| Colville | 0.0 /100 | #321 | Tragic 22.5% |
| Yakama | 0.0 /100 | #322 | Tragic 22.6% |
Ute Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Ute Data | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Data |
| Minimum | 0.028% | 9.6% |
| Maximum | 96.2% | 100.0% |
| Range | 96.2% | 90.4% |
| Mean | 22.5% | 33.1% |
| Median | 6.8% | 25.0% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 2.7% | 18.3% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 42.4% | 39.5% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 39.7% | 21.2% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 29.7% | 22.6% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 29.0% | 22.1% |
Correlation Details
| Ute Percentile | Sample Size | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
[ 0.0% - 0.5% ] 0.028% | 55,176,811 | 18.3% |
[ 0.5% - 1.0% ] 0.68% | 234,532 | 22.0% |
[ 1.0% - 1.5% ] 1.22% | 54,773 | 16.2% |
[ 1.5% - 2.0% ] 1.71% | 4,790 | 44.6% |
[ 2.0% - 2.5% ] 2.33% | 50,899 | 17.1% |
[ 2.5% - 3.0% ] 2.70% | 1,331 | 18.8% |
[ 3.0% - 3.5% ] 3.36% | 387 | 25.0% |
[ 4.0% - 4.5% ] 4.09% | 2,004 | 28.0% |
[ 4.5% - 5.0% ] 4.85% | 8,346 | 27.0% |
[ 5.0% - 5.5% ] 5.08% | 768 | 28.3% |
[ 5.5% - 6.0% ] 5.71% | 14,181 | 20.4% |
[ 6.5% - 7.0% ] 6.81% | 470 | 9.7% |
[ 7.5% - 8.0% ] 7.81% | 1,754 | 37.9% |
[ 8.0% - 8.5% ] 8.33% | 1,285 | 18.2% |
[ 11.5% - 12.0% ] 11.76% | 5,495 | 21.0% |
[ 16.0% - 16.5% ] 16.07% | 616 | 39.5% |
[ 26.5% - 27.0% ] 26.77% | 310 | 100.0% |
[ 42.0% - 42.5% ] 42.40% | 283 | 70.1% |
[ 52.0% - 52.5% ] 52.36% | 191 | 76.1% |
[ 67.5% - 68.0% ] 67.87% | 831 | 9.6% |
[ 71.0% - 71.5% ] 71.25% | 1,186 | 52.8% |
[ 78.0% - 78.5% ] 78.06% | 1,691 | 36.1% |
[ 96.0% - 96.5% ] 96.19% | 472 | 25.0% |