Chickasaw vs Apache Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 112,849,304 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Apache within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.282. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.018% in Apache. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 18.1 Apache.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Apache communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 24.5%, a difference of 10.6%), householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $49,395, a difference of 10.3%), and per capita income ($36,475 compared to $34,886, a difference of 4.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $82,184, a difference of 0.010%), median earnings ($40,672 compared to $40,388, a difference of 0.70%), and median family income ($85,356 compared to $84,451, a difference of 1.1%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Apache communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 54.6%), receiving food stamps (13.1% compared to 18.3%, a difference of 39.6%), and family poverty (10.8% compared to 14.7%, a difference of 35.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single female poverty (26.3% compared to 27.7%, a difference of 5.5%), single mother poverty (34.4% compared to 36.6%, a difference of 6.3%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (24.5% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 7.5%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Apache communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.9% compared to 8.4%, a difference of 70.8%), male unemployment (5.2% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 66.3%), and unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.2% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 65.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 10.2%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.7% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 12.8%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 8.4%, a difference of 14.3%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Apache communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 35.6%, a difference of 7.6%), in labor force | age 35-44 (80.9% compared to 77.9%, a difference of 3.9%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 3.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 77.1%, a difference of 2.5%), in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 60.7%, a difference of 2.6%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 79.2%, a difference of 3.4%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Apache communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (7.0% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 11.9%), births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 39.9%, a difference of 9.8%), and divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 9.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (28.2% compared to 29.0%, a difference of 2.7%), single father households (2.8% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 3.0%), and family households (64.4% compared to 66.5%, a difference of 3.3%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Apache communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 40.2%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 55.1%, a difference of 7.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 21.2%, a difference of 4.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 0.92%), 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 89.1%, a difference of 3.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 21.2%, a difference of 4.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Apache communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 22.3%), bachelor's degree (30.4% compared to 28.3%, a difference of 7.5%), and associate's degree (38.6% compared to 36.2%, a difference of 6.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.1%, a difference of 0.34%), kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.34%), and 1st grade (98.3% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.35%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Apache communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 16.8%), female disability (15.2% compared to 13.7%, a difference of 11.0%), and disability (15.2% compared to 13.9%, a difference of 9.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 18.6%, a difference of 0.71%), disability age 65 to 74 (30.2% compared to 29.7%, a difference of 1.8%), and disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 53.6%, a difference of 4.7%).