In 2022, about 37.7 percent of the U.S. population who were aged 25 and above had graduated from college or another higher education institution, a slight decline from 37.9 the previous year. However, this is a significant increase from 1960, when only 7.7 percent of the U.S. population had graduated from college. Demographics Educational attainment varies by gender, location, race, and age throughout the United States. Asian-American and Pacific Islanders had the highest level of education, on average, while Massachusetts and the District of Colombia are areas home to the highest rates of residents with a bachelor’s degree or higher. However, education levels are correlated with wealth. While public education is free up until the 12th grade, the cost of university is out of reach for many Americans, making social mobility increasingly difficult. Earnings White Americans with a professional degree earned the most money on average, compared to other educational levels and races. However, regardless of educational attainment, males typically earned far more on average compared to females. Despite the decreasing wage gap over the years in the country, it remains an issue to this day. Not only is there a large wage gap between males and females, but there is also a large income gap linked to race as well.

This graph shows the educational attainment of the U.S. population from in 2018, according to ethnicity. Around 56.5 percent of Asians and Pacific Islanders in the U.S. have graduated from college or obtained a higher educational degree in 2018.

In an impressive increase from years past, 39 percent of women in the United States had completed four years or more of college in 2022. This figure is up from 3.8 percent of women in 1940. A significant increase can also be seen in males, with 36.2 percent of the U.S. male population having completed four years or more of college in 2022, up from 5.5 percent in 1940.

4- and 2-year colleges

In the United States, college students are able to choose between attending a 2-year postsecondary program and a 4-year postsecondary program. Generally, attending a 2-year program results in an Associate’s Degree, and 4-year programs result in a Bachelor’s Degree.

Many 2-year programs are designed so that attendees can transfer to a college or university offering a 4-year program upon completing their Associate’s. Completion of a 4-year program is the generally accepted standard for entry-level positions when looking for a job.

Earnings after college

Factors such as gender, degree achieved, and the level of postsecondary education can have an impact on employment and earnings later in life. Some Bachelor’s degrees continue to attract more male students than female, particularly in STEM fields, while liberal arts degrees such as education, languages and literatures, and communication tend to see higher female attendance.

All of these factors have an impact on earnings after college, and despite nearly the same rate of attendance within the American population between males and females, men with a Bachelor’s Degree continue to have higher weekly earnings on average than their female counterparts.

U.S. citizens with a professional degree had the highest median household income in 2023, at 172,100 U.S. dollars. In comparison, those with less than a 9th grade education made significantly less money, at 35,690 U.S. dollars. Household income The median household income in the United States has fluctuated since 1990, but rose to around 70,000 U.S. dollars in 2021. Maryland had the highest median household income in the United States in 2021. Maryland’s high levels of wealth is due to several reasons, and includes the state's proximity to the nation's capital. Household income and ethnicity The median income of white non-Hispanic households in the United States had been on the rise since 1990, but declining since 2019. While income has also been on the rise, the median income of Hispanic households was much lower than those of white, non-Hispanic private households. However, the median income of Black households is even lower than Hispanic households. Income inequality is a problem without an easy solution in the United States, especially since ethnicity is a contributing factor. Systemic racism contributes to the non-White population suffering from income inequality, which causes the opportunity for growth to stagnate.

United States US: Government Expenditure per Student: Secondary: % of(GDP) Gross Domestic Productper Capita data was reported at 22.500 % in 2014. This records a decrease from the previous number of 22.657 % for 2013. United States US: Government Expenditure per Student: Secondary: % of(GDP) Gross Domestic Productper Capita data is updated yearly, averaging 22.810 % from Dec 2010 (Median) to 2014, with 5 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 24.341 % in 2010 and a record low of 22.500 % in 2014. United States US: Government Expenditure per Student: Secondary: % of(GDP) Gross Domestic Productper Capita data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Education Statistics. Government expenditure per student is the average general government expenditure (current, capital, and transfers) per student in the given level of education, expressed as a percentage of GDP per capita.; ; United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics.; Median;

United States US: Government Expenditure per Student: Tertiary: % of(GDP) Gross Domestic Productper Capita data was reported at 22.025 % in 2014. This records an increase from the previous number of 21.162 % for 2013. United States US: Government Expenditure per Student: Tertiary: % of(GDP) Gross Domestic Productper Capita data is updated yearly, averaging 21.162 % from Dec 2010 (Median) to 2014, with 5 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 22.025 % in 2014 and a record low of 20.079 % in 2011. United States US: Government Expenditure per Student: Tertiary: % of(GDP) Gross Domestic Productper Capita data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Education Statistics. Government expenditure per student is the average general government expenditure (current, capital, and transfers) per student in the given level of education, expressed as a percentage of GDP per capita.; ; United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics.; Median;

In 2022, Canada had the highest share of adults with a university degree, at over 60 percent of those between the ages of 25 and 64. India had the smallest share of people with a university degree, at 13 percent of the adult population. University around the world Deciding which university to attend can be a difficult decision for some and in today’s world, people are not left wanting for choice. There are thousands of universities around the world, with the highest number found in India and Indonesia. When picking which school to attend, some look to university rankings, where Harvard University in the United States consistently comes in on top. Moving on up One of the major perks of attending university is that it enables people to move up in the world. Getting a good education is generally seen as a giant step along the path to success and opens up doors for future employment. Future earnings potential can be determined by which university one attends, whether by the prestige of the university or the connections that have been made there. For instance, graduates from the Stanford Graduate School of Business can expect to earn around 250,000 U.S. dollars annually.

United States US: Government Expenditure per Student: Primary: % of(GDP) Gross Domestic Productper Capita data was reported at 19.909 % in 2014. This records an increase from the previous number of 19.777 % for 2013. United States US: Government Expenditure per Student: Primary: % of(GDP) Gross Domestic Productper Capita data is updated yearly, averaging 20.561 % from Dec 2010 (Median) to 2014, with 5 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 22.100 % in 2010 and a record low of 19.777 % in 2013. United States US: Government Expenditure per Student: Primary: % of(GDP) Gross Domestic Productper Capita data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Education Statistics. Government expenditure per student is the average general government expenditure (current, capital, and transfers) per student in the given level of education, expressed as a percentage of GDP per capita.; ; United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics.; Median;

United States US: Secondary Education: General Pupils data was reported at 24,417,185.769 Person in 2015. This records an increase from the previous number of 24,229,777.000 Person for 2014. United States US: Secondary Education: General Pupils data is updated yearly, averaging 21,754,500.000 Person from Dec 1971 (Median) to 2015, with 40 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 24,731,027.000 Person in 2007 and a record low of 19,270,000.000 Person in 1991. United States US: Secondary Education: General Pupils data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Education Statistics. Secondary general pupils are the number of secondary students enrolled in general education programs, including teacher training.; ; UNESCO Institute for Statistics; Sum; Each economy is classified based on the classification of World Bank Group's fiscal year 2018 (July 1, 2017-June 30, 2018).

School enrollment data are used to assess the socioeconomic condition of school-age children. Government agencies also require these data for funding allocations and program planning and implementation.

Data on school enrollment and grade or level attending were derived from answers to Question 10 in the 2015 American Community Survey (ACS). People were classified as enrolled in school if they were attending a public or private school or college at any time during the 3 months prior to the time of interview. The question included instructions to “include only nursery or preschool, kindergarten, elementary school, home school, and schooling which leads to a high school diploma, or a college degree.” Respondents who did not answer the enrollment question were assigned the enrollment status and type of school of a person with the same age, sex, race, and Hispanic or Latino origin whose residence was in the same or nearby area.

School enrollment is only recorded if the schooling advances a person toward an elementary school certificate, a high school diploma, or a college, university, or professional school (such as law or medicine) degree. Tutoring or correspondence schools are included if credit can be obtained from a public or private school or college. People enrolled in “vocational, technical, or business school” such as post secondary vocational, trade, hospital school, and on job training were not reported as enrolled in school. Field interviewers were instructed to classify individuals who were home schooled as enrolled in private school. The guide sent out with the mail questionnaire includes instructions for how to classify home schoolers.

Enrolled in Public and Private School – Includes people who attended school in the reference period and indicated they were enrolled by marking one of the questionnaire categories for “public school, public college,” or “private school, private college, home school.” The instruction guide defines a public school as “any school or college controlled and supported primarily by a local, county, state, or federal government.” Private schools are defined as schools supported and controlled primarily by religious organizations or other private groups. Home schools are defined as “parental-guided education outside of public or private school for grades 1-12.” Respondents who marked both the “public” and “private” boxes are edited to the first entry, “public.”

Grade in Which Enrolled – From 1999-2007, in the ACS, people reported to be enrolled in “public school, public college” or “private school, private college” were classified by grade or level according to responses to Question 10b, “What grade or level was this person attending?” Seven levels were identified: “nursery school, preschool;” “kindergarten;” elementary “grade 1 to grade 4” or “grade 5 to grade 8;” high school “grade 9 to grade 12;” “college undergraduate years (freshman to senior);” and “graduate or professional school (for example: medical, dental, or law school).”

In 2008, the school enrollment questions had several changes. “Home school” was explicitly included in the “private school, private college” category. For question 10b the categories changed to the following “Nursery school, preschool,” “Kindergarten,” “Grade 1 through grade 12,” “College undergraduate years (freshman to senior),” “Graduate or professional school beyond a bachelor’s degree (for example: MA or PhD program, or medical or law school).” The survey question allowed a write-in for the grades enrolled from 1-12.

Question/Concept History – Since 1999, the ACS enrollment status question (Question 10a) refers to “regular school or college,” while the 1996-1998 ACS did not restrict reporting to “regular” school, and contained an additional category for the “vocational, technical or business school.” The 1996-1998 ACS used the educational attainment question to estimate level of enrollment for those reported to be enrolled in school, and had a single year write-in for the attainment of grades 1 through 11. Grade levels estimated using the attainment question were not consistent with other estimates, so a new question specifically asking grade or level of enrollment was added starting with the 1999 ACS questionnaire.

Limitation of the Data – Beginning in 2006, the population universe in the ACS includes people living in group quarters. Data users may see slight differences in levels of school enrollment in any given geographic area due to the inclusion of this population. The extent of this difference, if any, depends on the type of group quarters present and whether the group quarters population makes up a large proportion of the total population. For example, in areas that are home to several colleges and universities, the percent of individuals 18 to 24 who were enrolled in college or graduate school would increase, as people living in college dormitories are now included in the universe.

Block group data from the 2019 - 2023 American Community Survey was aggregated by the Cambridge Community Development Department to generate neighborhood-level statistics. Categories include: Total Population, Language Spoken at Home by Population 5 and Older, Educational Attainment by Population 25 and Older, Means of Commute for Resident Workers Above 16, Vehicles Owned by Household, Per Capita Income, and Poverty Rates.

United States US: Secondary Education: Teachers data was reported at 1,661,375.000 Person in 2015. This records an increase from the previous number of 1,638,605.750 Person for 2014. United States US: Secondary Education: Teachers data is updated yearly, averaging 1,615,032.000 Person from Dec 1972 (Median) to 2015, with 23 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1,758,269.000 Person in 2010 and a record low of 1,003,000.000 Person in 1972. United States US: Secondary Education: Teachers data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Education Statistics. Secondary education teachers includes full-time and part-time teachers.; ; UNESCO Institute for Statistics; Sum; Each economy is classified based on the classification of World Bank Group's fiscal year 2018 (July 1, 2017-June 30, 2018).

The 2020-2021 School Learning Modalities dataset provides weekly estimates of school learning modality (including in-person, remote, or hybrid learning) for U.S. K-12 public and independent charter school districts for the 2020-2021 school year, from August 2020 – June 2021. These data were modeled using multiple sources of input data (see below) to infer the most likely learning modality of a school district for a given week. These data should be considered district-level estimates and may not always reflect true learning modality, particularly for districts in which data are unavailable. If a district reports multiple modality types within the same week, the modality offered for the majority of those days is reflected in the weekly estimate. All school district metadata are sourced from the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) for 2020-2021. School learning modality types are defined as follows: In-Person: All schools within the district offer face-to-face instruction 5 days per week to all students at all available grade levels. Remote: Schools within the district do not offer face-to-face instruction; all learning is conducted online/remotely to all students at all available grade levels. Hybrid: Schools within the district offer a combination of in-person and remote learning; face-to-face instruction is offered less than 5 days per week, or only to a subset of students. Data Information School learning modality data provided here are model estimates using combined input data and are not guaranteed to be 100% accurate. This learning modality dataset was generated by combining data from four different sources: Burbio [1], MCH Strategic Data [2], the AEI/Return to Learn Tracker [3], and state dashboards [4-20]. These data were combined using a Hidden Markov model which infers the sequence of learning modalities (In-Person, Hybrid, or Remote) for each district that is most likely to produce the modalities reported by these sources. This model was trained using data from the 2020-2021 school year. Metadata describing the location, number of schools and number of students in each district comes from NCES [21]. You can read more about the model in the CDC MMWR: COVID-19–Related School Closures and Learning Modality Changes — United States, August 1–September 17, 2021. The metrics listed for each school learning modality reflect totals by district and the number of enrolled students per district for which data are available. School districts represented here exclude private schools and include the following NCES subtypes: Public school district that is NOT a component of a supervisory union Public school district that is a component of a supervisory union Independent charter district “BI” in the state column refers to school districts funded by the Bureau of Indian Education. Technical Notes Data from September 1, 2020 to June 25, 2021 correspond to the 2020-2021 school year. During this timeframe, all four sources of data were available. Inferred modalities with a probability below 0.75 were deemed inconclusive and were omitted. Data for the month of July may show “In Person” status although most school districts are effectively closed during this time for summer break. Users may wish to exclude July data from use for this reason where applicable. Sources K-12 School Opening Tracker. Burbio 2021; https

This national-level survey of youth was undertaken to gather detailed behavioral and attitudinal data concerning weapons and violence. The research project sought to obtain information from a broad sample of high-school-aged youth to achieve diversity regarding history, cultural background, population size and density, urban and non-urban mix, economic situation, and class, race, and ethnic distributions. Data for the study were derived from two surveys conducted during the spring of 1996. The first survey was a lengthy questionnaire that focused on exposure to weapons (primarily firearms and knives) and violence, and was completed by 733 10th- and 11th-grade male students. Detail was gathered on all weapon-related incidents up to 12 months prior to the survey. The second survey, consisting of a questionnaire completed by 48 administrators of the 53 schools that the students attended, provided information regarding school characteristics, levels of weapon-related activity in the schools, and anti-violence strategies employed by the schools. The student survey covered demographic characteristics of the respondent, family living situations, educational situations and aspirations, drug, criminal, and gang activities, crime- and violence-related characteristics of family and friends, respondent's social and recreational activities, exposure to violence generally, personal victimization history, and possession of and activities relating to firearms and knives. Administrators were asked to provide basic demographic data about their schools and to rate the seriousness of violence, drugs, guns, and other weapons in their institutions. They were asked to provide weapon-related information about the average male junior in their schools as well as to estimate the number of incidents involving types of weapons on school grounds during the past three years. The administrators were also asked to identify, from an extensive list of violence reduction measures, those that were practiced at their schools. Variables are also provided about the type of school, grades taught, enrollment, and size of the community. In addition to the data collected directly from students and school administrators, Census information concerning the cities and towns in which the sampled schools were located was also obtained. Census data include size of the city or town, racial and ethnic population distributions, age, gender, and educational attainment distributions, median household and per capita income distributions, poverty rates, labor force and unemployment rates, and violent and property crime rates.

United States US: Secondary Education: Teachers: Female data was reported at 1,030,211.000 Person in 2015. This records an increase from the previous number of 1,016,414.188 Person for 2014. United States US: Secondary Education: Teachers: Female data is updated yearly, averaging 1,013,607.094 Person from Dec 1993 (Median) to 2015, with 22 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1,078,412.000 Person in 2010 and a record low of 734,456.000 Person in 1993. United States US: Secondary Education: Teachers: Female data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Education Statistics. Secondary education teachers includes full-time and part-time teachers.; ; UNESCO Institute for Statistics; Sum; Each economy is classified based on the classification of World Bank Group's fiscal year 2018 (July 1, 2017-June 30, 2018).

United States US: GERD Performed: Higher Education Sector data was reported at 9.905 % in 2022. This records a decrease from the previous number of 10.439 % for 2021. United States US: GERD Performed: Higher Education Sector data is updated yearly, averaging 11.863 % from Dec 1981 (Median) to 2022, with 42 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 14.250 % in 2004 and a record low of 8.898 % in 1984. United States US: GERD Performed: Higher Education Sector data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.OECD.MSTI: Gross Domestic Expenditure on Research and Development: OECD Member: Annual.

For the United States, from 2021 onwards, changes to the US BERD survey questionnaire allowed for more exhaustive identification of acquisition costs for ‘identifiable intangible assets’ used for R&D. This has resulted in a substantial increase in reported R&D capital expenditure within BERD. In the business sector, the funds from the rest of the world previously included in the business-financed BERD, are available separately from 2008. From 2006 onwards, GOVERD includes state government intramural performance (most of which being financed by the federal government and state government own funds). From 2016 onwards, PNPERD data are based on a new R&D performer survey. In the higher education sector all fields of SSH are included from 2003 onwards.

Following a survey of federally-funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) in 2005, it was concluded that FFRDC R&D belongs in the government sector - rather than the sector of the FFRDC administrator, as had been reported in the past. R&D expenditures by FFRDCs were reclassified from the other three R&D performing sectors to the Government sector; previously published data were revised accordingly. Between 2003 and 2004, the method used to classify data by industry has been revised. This particularly affects the ISIC category “wholesale trade” and consequently the BERD for total services.

U.S. R&D data are generally comparable, but there are some areas of underestimation:

1. i) Up to 2008, Government sector R&D performance covers only federal government activities. That by State and local government establishments is excluded;
2. ii) Except for the Government and the Business Enterprise sectors, the R&D data exclude most capital expenditures. For the Business Enterprise sector, depreciation is reported in place of gross capital expenditures up to 2014. Higher education (and national total) data were revised back to 1998 due to an improved methodology that corrects for double-counting of R&D funds passed between institutions.

Breakdown by type of R&D (basic research, applied research, etc.) was also revised back to 1998 in the business enterprise and higher education sectors due to improved estimation procedures.

The methodology for estimating researchers was changed as of 1985. In the Government, Higher Education and PNP sectors the data since then refer to employed doctoral scientists and engineers who report their primary work activity as research, development or the management of R&D, plus, for the Higher Education sector, the number of full-time equivalent graduate students with research assistantships averaging an estimated 50 % of their time engaged in R&D activities. As of 1985 researchers in the Government sector exclude military personnel. As of 1987, Higher education R&D personnel also include those who report their primary work activity as design.

Due to lack of official data for the different employment sectors, the total researchers figure is an OECD estimate up to 2019. Comprehensive reporting of R&D personnel statistics by the United States has resumed with records available since 2020, reflecting the addition of official figures for the number of researchers and total R&D personnel for the higher education sector and the Private non-profit sector; as well as the number of researchers for the government sector. The new data revise downwards previous OECD estimates as the OECD extrapolation methods drawing on historical US data, required to produce a consistent OECD aggregate, appear to have previously overestimated the growth in the number of researchers in the higher education sector.

Pre-production development is excluded from Defence GBARD (in accordance with the Frascati Manual) as of 2000. 2009 GBARD data also includes the one time incremental R&D funding legislated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Beginning with the 2000 GBARD data, budgets for capital expenditure – “R&D plant” in national terminology - are included. GBARD data for earlier years relate to budgets for current costs only.

The 2021-2022 School Learning Modalities dataset provides weekly estimates of school learning modality (including in-person, remote, or hybrid learning) for U.S. K-12 public and independent charter school districts for the 2021-2022 school year and the Fall 2022 semester, from August 2021 – December 2022.

These data were modeled using multiple sources of input data (see below) to infer the most likely learning modality of a school district for a given week. These data should be considered district-level estimates and may not always reflect true learning modality, particularly for districts in which data are unavailable. If a district reports multiple modality types within the same week, the modality offered for the majority of those days is reflected in the weekly estimate. All school district metadata are sourced from the https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/files.asp#Fiscal:2,LevelId:5,SchoolYearId:35,Page:1">National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) for 2020-2021.

School learning modality types are defined as follows:

• In-Person: All schools within the district offer face-to-face instruction 5 days per week to all students at all available grade levels.
• Remote: Schools within the district do not offer face-to-face instruction; all learning is conducted online/remotely to all students at all available grade levels.
• Hybrid: Schools within the district offer a combination of in-person and remote learning; face-to-face instruction is offered less than 5 days per week, or only to a subset of students.

• School learning modality data provided here are model estimates using combined input data and are not guaranteed to be 100% accurate. This learning modality dataset was generated by combining data from four different sources: Burbio [1], MCH Strategic Data [2], the AEI/Return to Learn Tracker [3], and state dashboards [4-20]. These data were combined using a Hidden Markov model which infers the sequence of learning modalities (In-Person, Hybrid, or Remote) for each district that is most likely to produce the modalities reported by these sources. This model was trained using data from the 2020-2021 school year. Metadata describing the location, number of schools and number of students in each district comes from NCES [21].
• You can read more about the model in the CDC MMWR: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7039e2.htm" target="_blank">COVID-19–Related School Closures and Learning Modality Changes — United States, August 1–September 17, 2021.
• The metrics listed for each school learning modality reflect totals by district and the number of enrolled students per district for which data are available. School districts represented here exclude private schools and include the following NCES subtypes:
  • Public school district that is NOT a component of a supervisory union
  • Public school district that is a component of a supervisory union
  • Independent charter district
• “BI” in the state column refers to school districts funded by the Bureau of Indian Education.

• Data from August 1, 2021 to June 24, 2022 correspond to the 2021-2022 school year. During this time frame, data from the AEI/Return to Learn Tracker and most state dashboards were not available. Inferred modalities with a probability below 0.6 were deemed inconclusive and were omitted. During the Fall 2022 semester, modalities for districts with a school closure reported by Burbio were updated to either “Remote”, if the closure spanned the entire week, or “Hybrid”, if the closure spanned 1-4 days of the week.
• Data from August 1, 2022 to December 31, 2022 correspond to the 2022-2023 school year and were processed in a similar manner to data from the 2021-2022 school year.
• Data for the month of July may show “In Person” status although most school districts are effectively closed during this time for summer break. Users may wish to exclude July data from use for this reason where applicable.

1. K-12 School Opening Tracker. Burbio 2021; https://cai.burbio.com/school-opening-tracker/. June 2021.
2. COVID-19 IMPACT: School District Operational Status. MCH Strategic Data: 2021; https://www.mchdata.com/covid19/schoolclosings. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
3. Return to Learn Tracker. American Enterprise Institute 2021; https://www.returntolearntracker.net/. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
4. Colorado School District Reopening Plans. Colorado Department of Education 2021; https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQipdjO8QWhilhhJ4bX0FBebnHEzK1G3LEDQbE_S-xRvs2t0oHNm--acHwMRFmL9uKw4cXcOUqy1V66/pubhtml. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
5. Connecticut Report Cards. Connecticut State Department of Education 2021; http://edsight.ct.gov/SASPortal/main.do. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
6. COVID Planning Tool. Hawaii Department of Education 2021; https://public.tableau.com/views/COVIDPlanningTool-Embed700px/SimpleDashboard. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
7. Idaho School District Status. Idaho State Department of Education 2021; https://ioem.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/379299e56f234fa89cff3c8c6acf3ac8. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
8. How Illinois Districts Are Providing Instruction: Virtual, In-Person, and Blended Learning. Illinois State Board of Education 2021; https://isp.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/fceeacb37da04de4b237ed941dd7d5c4. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
9. Digital Learning Model Schools. Louisiana Department of Education 2021; https://analytics.la.gov/t/DOE/views/DigitalLearningModel/SchoolLevelModeofLearning. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
10. Safe Learning Model Dashboard. Minnesota Department of Education 2021; https://analytics.education.state.mn.us/t/MDEPublic/views/MN_Safe_Learning_Model/Dashboard. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
11. Coronavirus (COVID-19) information. Missouri Department of Elementary & Secondary Education 2021; https://dese.mo.gov/communications/coronavirus-covid-19-information. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
12. North Carolina School Dashboard. North Carolina Department of Public Instruction 2021. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1We8gDpa4Do5NR83Nf8niGE_YxzLDf-KZh-tVWifStxE/edit#gid=0. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
13. Ring the Bell: Return to In-Person Learning. New Mexico Public Education Department 2021; https://webnew.ped.state.nm.us/reentry-district-and-school-guidance/. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
14. Reset and Restart Education. Ohio Department of Education 2021; http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Reset-and-Restart. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
15. 2020-21 School Status. Oregon Department of Education 2021; https://www.oregon.gov/ode/students-and-family/healthsafety/Pages/2020-21-School-Status.aspx. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
16. Current Operational Status. South Carolina Department of Education 2021; https://ed.sc.gov/districts-schools/schools/district-and-school-closures/operational-status/#blk2102. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
17. Tennessee Department of Education COVID-19 District Information. Tennessee Department of Education 2021; https://districtinformation.tnedu.gov/covid-information/search/-1. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
18. State Snapshot: Virginia School Operational Status. Virginia Department of Education 2021; https://www.doe.virginia.gov/support/health_medical/office/reopen-status.shtml. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
19. Current Reopening Status of Vermont's K-12 Public Schools. Vermont Department of Financial Regulation 2021; https://dfr.vermont.gov/about-us/covid-19/school-reopening#public-school. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
20. School Reopening Data. Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction 2021; https://www.k12.wa.us/about-ospi/press-releases/novel-coronavirus-covid-19-guidance-resources/school-reopening-data. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).
21. Public school districts. National Center for Education Statistics 2021; https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/. (30 June 2021, date last accessed).

United States Number of Researchers: Total data was reported at 1,889,780.000 Person in 2021. This records an increase from the previous number of 1,823,522.000 Person for 2020. United States Number of Researchers: Total data is updated yearly, averaging 1,856,651.000 Person from Dec 2020 (Median) to 2021, with 2 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1,889,780.000 Person in 2021 and a record low of 1,823,522.000 Person in 2020. United States Number of Researchers: Total data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.OECD.MSTI: Number of Researchers and Personnel on Research and Development: OECD Member: Annual.

For the United States, from 2021 onwards, changes to the US BERD survey questionnaire allowed for more exhaustive identification of acquisition costs for ‘identifiable intangible assets’ used for R&D. This has resulted in a substantial increase in reported R&D capital expenditure within BERD. In the business sector, the funds from the rest of the world previously included in the business-financed BERD, are available separately from 2008. From 2006 onwards, GOVERD includes state government intramural performance (most of which being financed by the federal government and state government own funds). From 2016 onwards, PNPERD data are based on a new R&D performer survey. In the higher education sector all fields of SSH are included from 2003 onwards.

Following a survey of federally-funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) in 2005, it was concluded that FFRDC R&D belongs in the government sector - rather than the sector of the FFRDC administrator, as had been reported in the past. R&D expenditures by FFRDCs were reclassified from the other three R&D performing sectors to the Government sector; previously published data were revised accordingly. Between 2003 and 2004, the method used to classify data by industry has been revised. This particularly affects the ISIC category “wholesale trade” and consequently the BERD for total services.

U.S. R&D data are generally comparable, but there are some areas of underestimation:

1. i) Up to 2008, Government sector R&D performance covers only federal government activities. That by State and local government establishments is excluded;
2. ii) Except for the Government and the Business Enterprise sectors, the R&D data exclude most capital expenditures. For the Business Enterprise sector, depreciation is reported in place of gross capital expenditures up to 2014. Higher education (and national total) data were revised back to 1998 due to an improved methodology that corrects for double-counting of R&D funds passed between institutions.

Breakdown by type of R&D (basic research, applied research, etc.) was also revised back to 1998 in the business enterprise and higher education sectors due to improved estimation procedures.

The methodology for estimating researchers was changed as of 1985. In the Government, Higher Education and PNP sectors the data since then refer to employed doctoral scientists and engineers who report their primary work activity as research, development or the management of R&D, plus, for the Higher Education sector, the number of full-time equivalent graduate students with research assistantships averaging an estimated 50 % of their time engaged in R&D activities. As of 1985 researchers in the Government sector exclude military personnel. As of 1987, Higher education R&D personnel also include those who report their primary work activity as design.

Due to lack of official data for the different employment sectors, the total researchers figure is an OECD estimate up to 2019. Comprehensive reporting of R&D personnel statistics by the United States has resumed with records available since 2020, reflecting the addition of official figures for the number of researchers and total R&D personnel for the higher education sector and the Private non-profit sector; as well as the number of researchers for the government sector. The new data revise downwards previous OECD estimates as the OECD extrapolation methods drawing on historical US data, required to produce a consistent OECD aggregate, appear to have previously overestimated the growth in the number of researchers in the higher education sector.

Pre-production development is excluded from Defence GBARD (in accordance with the Frascati Manual) as of 2000. 2009 GBARD data also includes the one time incremental R&D funding legislated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Beginning with the 2000 GBARD data, budgets for capital expenditure – “R&D plant” in national terminology - are included. GBARD data for earlier years relate to budgets for current costs only.

United States US: GERD per Capita Population: Current PPP data was reported at 2,767.780 % in 2022. This records an increase from the previous number of 2,472.601 % for 2021. United States US: GERD per Capita Population: Current PPP data is updated yearly, averaging 972.628 % from Dec 1981 (Median) to 2022, with 42 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2,767.780 % in 2022 and a record low of 316.293 % in 1981. United States US: GERD per Capita Population: Current PPP data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.OECD.MSTI: Gross Domestic Expenditure on Research and Development: OECD Member: Annual.

For the United States, from 2021 onwards, changes to the US BERD survey questionnaire allowed for more exhaustive identification of acquisition costs for ‘identifiable intangible assets’ used for R&D. This has resulted in a substantial increase in reported R&D capital expenditure within BERD. In the business sector, the funds from the rest of the world previously included in the business-financed BERD, are available separately from 2008. From 2006 onwards, GOVERD includes state government intramural performance (most of which being financed by the federal government and state government own funds). From 2016 onwards, PNPERD data are based on a new R&D performer survey. In the higher education sector all fields of SSH are included from 2003 onwards.

Following a survey of federally-funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) in 2005, it was concluded that FFRDC R&D belongs in the government sector - rather than the sector of the FFRDC administrator, as had been reported in the past. R&D expenditures by FFRDCs were reclassified from the other three R&D performing sectors to the Government sector; previously published data were revised accordingly. Between 2003 and 2004, the method used to classify data by industry has been revised. This particularly affects the ISIC category “wholesale trade” and consequently the BERD for total services.

U.S. R&D data are generally comparable, but there are some areas of underestimation:

1. i) Up to 2008, Government sector R&D performance covers only federal government activities. That by State and local government establishments is excluded;
2. ii) Except for the Government and the Business Enterprise sectors, the R&D data exclude most capital expenditures. For the Business Enterprise sector, depreciation is reported in place of gross capital expenditures up to 2014. Higher education (and national total) data were revised back to 1998 due to an improved methodology that corrects for double-counting of R&D funds passed between institutions.

Breakdown by type of R&D (basic research, applied research, etc.) was also revised back to 1998 in the business enterprise and higher education sectors due to improved estimation procedures.

The methodology for estimating researchers was changed as of 1985. In the Government, Higher Education and PNP sectors the data since then refer to employed doctoral scientists and engineers who report their primary work activity as research, development or the management of R&D, plus, for the Higher Education sector, the number of full-time equivalent graduate students with research assistantships averaging an estimated 50 % of their time engaged in R&D activities. As of 1985 researchers in the Government sector exclude military personnel. As of 1987, Higher education R&D personnel also include those who report their primary work activity as design.

Due to lack of official data for the different employment sectors, the total researchers figure is an OECD estimate up to 2019. Comprehensive reporting of R&D personnel statistics by the United States has resumed with records available since 2020, reflecting the addition of official figures for the number of researchers and total R&D personnel for the higher education sector and the Private non-profit sector; as well as the number of researchers for the government sector. The new data revise downwards previous OECD estimates as the OECD extrapolation methods drawing on historical US data, required to produce a consistent OECD aggregate, appear to have previously overestimated the growth in the number of researchers in the higher education sector.

Pre-production development is excluded from Defence GBARD (in accordance with the Frascati Manual) as of 2000. 2009 GBARD data also includes the one time incremental R&D funding legislated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Beginning with the 2000 GBARD data, budgets for capital expenditure – “R&D plant” in national terminology - are included. GBARD data for earlier years relate to budgets for current costs only.

This research project examined rural and urban trends in family and intimate partner homicide for the 20-year period from 1980 through 1999. The construct of place served as a backdrop against which changes in trends in family/partner homicide were tracked, and against which various independent measures that purportedly explain variation in the rates were tested. The project merged data from several sources. The offender data file from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR) series for 1980 through 1999 was the primary data source. Data for arrests for violent crime, drug, and alcohol-related offenses were obtained from the FBI Report A Arrest File. Population, population density, and race (and racial segregation) data from the decennial U.S. Census for 1980, 1990, and 2000 were also obtained. Data on hospitals, educational attainment, unemployment, and per capita income were obtained from the 2002 Area Resource File (ARF). The total number of proprietors (farm and non-farm) in the United States by state and county for each year were provided by the Regional Economic Profiles data. The project's population and proximity indicator used four categories: metropolitan, nonmetropolitan populations adjacent to a metropolitan area, nonmetropolitan populations not adjacent to a metropolitan area, and rural. Data include homicide rates for 1980 through 1999 for intimate partner homicide, family homicide, all other homicide, and all homicide. Additional variables are included as measures of community socioeconomic distress, such as residential overcrowding, isolation, traditionalist views of women and family, lack of access to health care, and substance abuse. Five-year averages are included for each of the rates and measures listed above.