Pima vs Cherokee Community Comparison
COMPARE
Pima
Cherokee
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Pima
Cherokee
1,700
SOCIAL INDEX
14.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
291st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,697
SOCIAL INDEX
24.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
243rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Cherokee Integration in Pima Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 60,871,563 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Cherokee within Pima communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.202. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Pima within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.002% in Cherokee. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Pima corresponds to an increase of 2.2 Cherokee.
Pima vs Cherokee Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (21.1% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 29.8%), per capita income ($30,644 compared to $37,203, a difference of 21.4%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($73,365 compared to $86,125, a difference of 17.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median female earnings ($35,326 compared to $34,742, a difference of 1.7%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($82,821 compared to $80,843, a difference of 2.5%), and householder income over 65 years ($50,539 compared to $54,133, a difference of 7.1%).
Income Metric | Pima | Cherokee |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $30,644 | Tragic $37,203 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $77,431 | Tragic $88,209 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $63,262 | Tragic $72,682 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $38,285 | Tragic $41,252 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $42,357 | Tragic $48,669 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $35,326 | Tragic $34,742 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Poor $51,503 | Tragic $47,848 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $82,821 | Tragic $80,843 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $73,365 | Tragic $86,125 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $50,539 | Tragic $54,133 |
Wage/Income Gap | Exceptional 21.1% | Tragic 27.4% |
Pima vs Cherokee Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (23.9% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 98.6%), married-couple family poverty (11.4% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 97.9%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (19.8% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 80.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother poverty (38.6% compared to 34.5%, a difference of 11.8%), single female poverty (30.3% compared to 25.7%, a difference of 18.2%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (28.4% compared to 22.7%, a difference of 25.3%).
Poverty Metric | Pima | Cherokee |
Poverty | Tragic 21.9% | Tragic 14.4% |
Families | Tragic 18.4% | Tragic 10.6% |
Males | Tragic 20.4% | Tragic 13.1% |
Females | Tragic 23.6% | Tragic 15.6% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 28.4% | Tragic 22.7% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 25.3% | Tragic 17.2% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 27.4% | Tragic 21.7% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 29.0% | Tragic 19.5% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 29.7% | Tragic 19.7% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 28.2% | Tragic 19.9% |
Single Males | Tragic 20.2% | Tragic 16.1% |
Single Females | Tragic 30.3% | Tragic 25.7% |
Single Fathers | Exceptional 14.8% | Tragic 19.6% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 38.6% | Tragic 34.5% |
Married Couples | Tragic 11.4% | Tragic 5.8% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Tragic 19.8% | Average 11.0% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Tragic 23.9% | Good 12.0% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 19.0% | Tragic 13.2% |
Pima vs Cherokee Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (11.8% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 125.0%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (11.7% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 103.5%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (18.9% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 88.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.8% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 3.1%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.2% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 6.8%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (6.6% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 22.2%).
Unemployment Metric | Pima | Cherokee |
Unemployment | Tragic 8.2% | Fair 5.3% |
Males | Tragic 8.3% | Tragic 5.6% |
Females | Tragic 9.3% | Fair 5.3% |
Youth < 25 | Tragic 16.2% | Fair 11.8% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Tragic 23.1% | Poor 17.9% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Tragic 14.2% | Tragic 10.5% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Tragic 11.8% | Tragic 7.6% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 9.6% | Tragic 6.4% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 11.8% | Tragic 5.2% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Tragic 6.4% | Poor 4.6% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Tragic 6.6% | Tragic 5.0% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Excellent 4.8% | Poor 4.9% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 6.6% | Fair 5.4% |
Seniors > 65 | Tragic 6.3% | Excellent 5.1% |
Seniors > 75 | Tragic 9.2% | Tragic 9.8% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 13.4% | Tragic 9.3% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Tragic 18.9% | Tragic 10.0% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Tragic 11.7% | Tragic 5.7% |
Pima vs Cherokee Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (34.1% compared to 40.2%, a difference of 18.0%), in labor force | age 25-29 (74.3% compared to 82.1%, a difference of 10.5%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (69.0% compared to 76.2%, a difference of 10.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (79.0% compared to 81.6%, a difference of 3.3%), in labor force | age > 16 (57.4% compared to 61.9%, a difference of 7.9%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (72.8% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 8.4%).
Labor Participation Metric | Pima | Cherokee |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 57.4% | Tragic 61.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 69.0% | Tragic 76.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Tragic 34.1% | Exceptional 40.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Tragic 69.0% | Exceptional 75.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 74.3% | Tragic 82.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 79.0% | Tragic 81.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 74.8% | Tragic 81.4% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 72.8% | Tragic 79.0% |
Pima vs Cherokee Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in single father households (4.2% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 59.2%), births to unmarried women (51.5% compared to 36.7%, a difference of 40.4%), and married-couple households (35.6% compared to 46.7%, a difference of 31.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.1% compared to 27.5%, a difference of 1.4%), family households (65.9% compared to 65.0%, a difference of 1.5%), and divorced or separated (12.9% compared to 13.7%, a difference of 6.6%).
Family Structure Metric | Pima | Cherokee |
Family Households | Exceptional 65.9% | Exceptional 65.0% |
Family Households with Children | Tragic 27.1% | Average 27.5% |
Married-couple Households | Tragic 35.6% | Good 46.7% |
Average Family Size | Exceptional 3.75 | Tragic 3.18 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 4.2% | Tragic 2.6% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 8.3% | Tragic 6.8% |
Currently Married | Tragic 35.9% | Good 46.9% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 12.9% | Tragic 13.7% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 51.5% | Tragic 36.7% |
Pima vs Cherokee Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (14.1% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 82.6%), 2 or more vehicles in household (52.0% compared to 59.9%, a difference of 15.1%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (86.3% compared to 92.4%, a difference of 7.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 4 or more vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 1.6%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.0% compared to 23.0%, a difference of 4.3%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (86.3% compared to 92.4%, a difference of 7.1%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Pima | Cherokee |
No Vehicles Available | Tragic 14.1% | Exceptional 7.7% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 86.3% | Exceptional 92.4% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Tragic 52.0% | Exceptional 59.9% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.0% | Exceptional 23.0% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Exceptional 7.7% |
Pima vs Cherokee Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in bachelor's degree (23.2% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 30.1%), associate's degree (30.2% compared to 38.9%, a difference of 28.6%), and master's degree (9.2% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 22.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1st grade (98.2% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.10%), nursery school (98.2% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.11%), and kindergarten (98.2% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.11%).
Education Level Metric | Pima | Cherokee |
No Schooling Completed | Average 2.1% | Exceptional 1.7% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.3% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.3% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.3% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Exceptional 98.3% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Exceptional 98.2% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 97.7% | Exceptional 98.0% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Exceptional 97.8% |
6th Grade | Excellent 97.2% | Exceptional 97.6% |
7th Grade | Good 96.1% | Exceptional 96.8% |
8th Grade | Fair 95.6% | Exceptional 96.5% |
9th Grade | Tragic 93.9% | Exceptional 95.4% |
10th Grade | Tragic 91.2% | Excellent 94.1% |
11th Grade | Tragic 88.3% | Average 92.4% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 84.6% | Tragic 90.5% |
High School Diploma | Tragic 81.6% | Poor 88.5% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 76.4% | Tragic 83.9% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 51.4% | Tragic 60.1% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 45.6% | Tragic 53.2% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 30.2% | Tragic 38.9% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 23.2% | Tragic 30.2% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 9.2% | Tragic 11.4% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.3% | Tragic 3.3% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.3% | Tragic 1.5% |
Pima vs Cherokee Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Pima and Cherokee communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 66.9%), disability age 65 to 74 (38.6% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 36.9%), and male disability (12.8% compared to 14.8%, a difference of 15.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female disability (14.8% compared to 14.9%, a difference of 0.48%), self-care disability (2.8% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 3.5%), and disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 15.5%, a difference of 4.4%).
Disability Metric | Pima | Cherokee |
Disability | Tragic 13.7% | Tragic 14.8% |
Males | Tragic 12.8% | Tragic 14.8% |
Females | Tragic 14.8% | Tragic 14.9% |
Age | Under 5 years | Exceptional 1.1% | Tragic 1.8% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.2% | Tragic 6.9% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 7.7% | Tragic 8.7% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Tragic 15.5% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 38.6% | Tragic 28.2% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 55.8% | Tragic 50.2% |
Vision | Tragic 3.3% | Tragic 2.9% |
Hearing | Tragic 3.7% | Tragic 4.2% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.8% | Tragic 18.0% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.2% | Tragic 7.9% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.8% | Tragic 2.9% |