44 datasets found
  1. Cost of living index in the U.S. 2024, by state

    • statista.com
    Updated May 27, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2025). Cost of living index in the U.S. 2024, by state [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1240947/cost-of-living-index-usa-by-state/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    May 27, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Time period covered
    2024
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    West Virginia and Kansas had the lowest cost of living across all U.S. states, with composite costs being half of those found in Hawaii. This was according to a composite index that compares prices for various goods and services on a state-by-state basis. In West Virginia, the cost of living index amounted to **** — well below the national benchmark of 100. Virginia— which had an index value of ***** — was only slightly above that benchmark. Expensive places to live included Hawaii, Massachusetts, and California. Housing costs in the U.S. Housing is usually the highest expense in a household’s budget. In 2023, the average house sold for approximately ******* U.S. dollars, but house prices in the Northeast and West regions were significantly higher. Conversely, the South had some of the least expensive housing. In West Virginia, Mississippi, and Louisiana, the median price of the typical single-family home was less than ******* U.S. dollars. That makes living expenses in these states significantly lower than in states such as Hawaii and California, where housing is much pricier. What other expenses affect the cost of living? Utility costs such as electricity, natural gas, water, and internet also influence the cost of living. In Alaska, Hawaii, and Connecticut, the average monthly utility cost exceeded *** U.S. dollars. That was because of the significantly higher prices for electricity and natural gas in these states.

  2. p

    Live Music Bars in Massachusetts, United States - 75 Verified Listings...

    • poidata.io
    csv, excel, json
    Updated Jul 23, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Poidata.io (2025). Live Music Bars in Massachusetts, United States - 75 Verified Listings Database [Dataset]. https://www.poidata.io/report/live-music-bar/united-states/massachusetts
    Explore at:
    csv, excel, jsonAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Jul 23, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    Poidata.io
    Area covered
    United States, Massachusetts
    Description

    Comprehensive dataset of 75 Live music bars in Massachusetts, United States as of July, 2025. Includes verified contact information (email, phone), geocoded addresses, customer ratings, reviews, business categories, and operational details. Perfect for market research, lead generation, competitive analysis, and business intelligence. Download a complimentary sample to evaluate data quality and completeness.

  3. m

    Massachusetts Population by Race/Ethnicity

    • mass.gov
    Updated Feb 9, 2018
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Department of Public Health (2018). Massachusetts Population by Race/Ethnicity [Dataset]. https://www.mass.gov/info-details/massachusetts-population-by-raceethnicity
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Feb 9, 2018
    Dataset provided by
    Population Health Information Tool
    Department of Public Health
    Area covered
    Massachusetts
    Description

    How racially diverse are residents in Massachusetts? This topic shows the demographic breakdown of residents by race/ethnicity and the increases in the Non-white population since 2010.

  4. a

    Long Term Care Facility

    • cape-ann-community-wildfire-protection-plan-gloucesterma.hub.arcgis.com
    Updated May 21, 2024
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    elisabeth.hitzfelder_gloucesterma (2024). Long Term Care Facility [Dataset]. https://cape-ann-community-wildfire-protection-plan-gloucesterma.hub.arcgis.com/datasets/a9a2c77ecdbc49489917dd990c3081a0
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    May 21, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    elisabeth.hitzfelder_gloucesterma
    Area covered
    Description

    The Long Term Care Residences point datalayer contains the locations of licensed nursing homes, rest homes and assisted living residences in Massachusetts.Data on nursing homes and rest homes were provided by the Division of Health Care Facility Licensure and Certification and the Bureau of Environmental Health within the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH). Information on assisted living residences was provided by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Elder Affairs. The update published in Spring 2019 is based on listings as of Spring 2018, and replaces the Spring 2007 version of this dataset.Long-term care residences provide housing and services for individuals who are managing illness and/or disability attributed to physical and/or mental health conditions. While terminology may vary, generally long-term care facilities are distinguished by the type of medical and custodial (non-medical services such as dressing, bathing, etc.) care they provide, the relative independence of their residents, and the types of on-site amenities. Furthermore, some facilities cater to specific patient populations (e.g. Alzheimer's patients).For the purposes of this datalayer, a nursing home is defined as a residential facility that provides 24-hour nursing care, rehabilitative services and activities of daily living to the chronically ill who require a relatively high level of institutional support. A rest home provides 24-hour supervision and supportive services for individuals who do not routinely need nursing or medical care. Similarly, assisted living residences provide residents with housing and various daily living support services, but usually do not offer medical care. Assisted living residences often emphasize greater autonomy and privacy for residents through individual apartment-style rentals.Other residential facilities that provide long term care such as group homes (i.e. boarding homes or congregate housing) and hospice facilities are not explicitly specified in this datalayer. Many locations in this datalayer, however, may offer additional services ranging from independent retirement living to intensive skilled nursing and palliative care. Non-residential care locations such as adult day health, rehabilitation, and senior centers are omitted.MassGIS stores the data as LONGTERMCARE_PT. The March 2007 update this layer replaced NURSRESTHOMES_PT, which did not contain assisted living residences.MDPH staff used Accumail address correction software to clean and standardize addresses, and then geocoded the lists using TeleAtlas and/or Navteq street centerlines. Wherever possible, MDPH staff adjusted geocoded point locations to better represent actual locations of the facilities. Spatial refinement was done using a variety of sources (orthogonal and oblique aerial imagery, on-line property cards, facility websites, etc.). MassGIS staff performed additional quality assurance and adjusted the location of some features to Master Address Database building points. Attributes were verified and updated by MassGIS staff.

  5. TIGER/Line Shapefile, 2023, State, Massachusetts, Area Landmark

    • res1catalogd-o-tdatad-o-tgov.vcapture.xyz
    • catalog.data.gov
    Updated Dec 15, 2023
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geospatial Products Branch (Point of Contact) (2023). TIGER/Line Shapefile, 2023, State, Massachusetts, Area Landmark [Dataset]. https://res1catalogd-o-tdatad-o-tgov.vcapture.xyz/dataset/tiger-line-shapefile-2023-state-massachusetts-area-landmark
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Dec 15, 2023
    Dataset provided by
    United States Census Bureauhttp://census.gov/
    United States Department of Commercehttp://commerce.gov/
    Area covered
    Massachusetts
    Description

    The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national filewith no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independentdata set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Census Bureau includes landmarks in the MTDB for locating special features and to help enumerators during field operations. Some of the more common landmark types include area landmarks such as airports, cemeteries, parks, schools, andchurches and other religious institutions. The Census Bureau added landmark features to MTDB on an as-needed basis andmade no attempt to ensure that all instances of a particular feature were included. The presence or absence of a landmark such as a hospital or prison does not mean that the living quarters associated with that landmark were geocoded to that census tabulation block or excluded from the census enumeration. The Area Landmark Shapefile does not include military installations or water bodies because they each appear in their own separate shapefiles, MIL.shp and AREAWATER.shp respectively.

  6. N

    cities in Massachusetts Ranked by Hispanic Black Population // 2025 Edition

    • neilsberg.com
    csv, json
    Updated Feb 13, 2025
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Neilsberg Research (2025). cities in Massachusetts Ranked by Hispanic Black Population // 2025 Edition [Dataset]. https://www.neilsberg.com/insights/lists/cities-in-massachusetts-by-hispanic-black-population/
    Explore at:
    csv, jsonAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Feb 13, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Neilsberg Research
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Area covered
    Massachusetts
    Variables measured
    Hispanic Black Population, Hispanic Black Population as Percent of Total Population of cities in Massachusetts, Hispanic Black Population as Percent of Total Hispanic Black Population of Massachusetts
    Measurement technique
    To measure the rank and respective trends, we initially gathered data from the five most recent American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates. We then analyzed and categorized the data for each of the racial categories identified by the U.S. Census Bureau. Based on the required racial category classification, we calculated the rank. For geographies with no population reported for the chosen race, we did not assign a rank and excluded them from the list. It is possible that a small population exists but was not reported or captured due to limitations or variations in Census data collection and reporting. We ensured that the population estimates used in this dataset pertain exclusively to the identified racial categories and do not rely on any ethnicity classification, unless explicitly required.For further information regarding these estimates, please feel free to reach out to us via email at research@neilsberg.com.
    Dataset funded by
    Neilsberg Research
    Description
    About this dataset

    Context

    This list ranks the 345 cities in the Massachusetts by Hispanic Black or African American population, as estimated by the United States Census Bureau. It also highlights population changes in each cities over the past five years.

    Content

    When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, including:

    • 2019-2023 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
    • 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
    • 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
    • 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
    • 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

    Variables / Data Columns

    • Rank by Hispanic Black Population: This column displays the rank of cities in the Massachusetts by their Hispanic Black or African American population, using the most recent ACS data available.
    • cities: The cities for which the rank is shown in the previous column.
    • Hispanic Black Population: The Hispanic Black population of the cities is shown in this column.
    • % of Total cities Population: This shows what percentage of the total cities population identifies as Hispanic Black. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
    • % of Total Massachusetts Hispanic Black Population: This tells us how much of the entire Massachusetts Hispanic Black population lives in that cities. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
    • 5 Year Rank Trend: TThis column displays the rank trend across the last 5 years.

    Good to know

    Margin of Error

    Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

    Custom data

    If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

    Inspiration

    Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

  7. p

    Live Music Venues in Massachusetts, United States - 407 Verified Listings...

    • poidata.io
    csv, excel, json
    Updated Jul 19, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Poidata.io (2025). Live Music Venues in Massachusetts, United States - 407 Verified Listings Database [Dataset]. https://www.poidata.io/report/live-music-venue/united-states/massachusetts
    Explore at:
    csv, excel, jsonAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Jul 19, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    Poidata.io
    Area covered
    Massachusetts, United States
    Description

    Comprehensive dataset of 407 Live music venues in Massachusetts, United States as of July, 2025. Includes verified contact information (email, phone), geocoded addresses, customer ratings, reviews, business categories, and operational details. Perfect for market research, lead generation, competitive analysis, and business intelligence. Download a complimentary sample to evaluate data quality and completeness.

  8. b

    Income-Restricted Housing Inventory

    • data.boston.gov
    pdf
    Updated Jul 6, 2023
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Mayor's Office of Housing (2023). Income-Restricted Housing Inventory [Dataset]. https://data.boston.gov/dataset/income-restricted-housing
    Explore at:
    pdf(104953)Available download formats
    Dataset updated
    Jul 6, 2023
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Mayor's Office of Housing
    Description

    This data, maintained by the Mayor’s Office of Housing (MOH), is an inventory of all income-restricted units in the city. This data includes public housing owned by the Boston Housing Authority (BHA), privately- owned housing built with funding from DND and/or on land that was formerly City-owned, and privately-owned housing built without any City subsidy, e.g., created using Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) or as part of the Inclusionary Development Policy (IDP). Information is gathered from a variety of sources, including the City's IDP list, permitting and completion data from the Inspectional Services Department (ISD), newspaper advertisements for affordable units, Community Economic Development Assistance Corporation’s (CEDAC) Expiring Use list, and project lists from the BHA, the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), MassHousing, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), among others. The data is meant to be as exhaustive and up-to-date as possible, but since many units are not required to report data to the City of Boston, MOH is constantly working to verify and update it. See the data dictionary for more information on the structure of the data and important notes. The database only includes units that have a deed-restriction. It does not include tenant-based (also known as mobile) vouchers, which subsidize rent, but move with the tenant and are not attached to a particular unit. There are over 22,000 tenant-based vouchers in the city of Boston which provide additional affordability to low- and moderate-income households not accounted for here. The Income-Restricted Housing report can be directly accessed here:
    https://www.boston.gov/sites/default/files/file/2023/04/Income%20Restricted%20Housing%202022_0.pdf

    Learn more about income-restricted housing (as well as other types of affordable housing) here: https://www.boston.gov/affordable-housing-boston#income-restricted

  9. Population of Massachusetts 2023, by race and ethnicity

    • statista.com
    Updated Jul 11, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2025). Population of Massachusetts 2023, by race and ethnicity [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/551908/massachusetts-population-ethnicity-race/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 11, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Time period covered
    2023
    Area covered
    United States, Massachusetts
    Description

    In 2023, about ******* people in Massachusetts were of Hispanic or Latino origin. Furthermore, there were about **** million white people and ******* Asian people living in Massachusetts in that year.

  10. m

    MassGIS Master Address Points (Feature Service)

    • gis.data.mass.gov
    • hub.arcgis.com
    Updated Feb 1, 2024
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    MassGIS - Bureau of Geographic Information (2024). MassGIS Master Address Points (Feature Service) [Dataset]. https://gis.data.mass.gov/datasets/massgis-master-address-points-feature-service
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Feb 1, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    MassGIS - Bureau of Geographic Information
    Area covered
    Description

    MassGIS is working very closely with the State 911 Department in the state’s Executive Office of Public Safety and Security on the Next Generation 911 Emergency Call System. MassGIS developed and is maintaining the map and address information that are at the heart of this new system. Statewide deployment of this new 9-1-1 call routing system was completed in 2018.Address sources include the Voter Registration List from the Secretary of the Commonwealth, site addresses from municipal departments (primarily assessors), and customer address lists from utilities. Addresses from utilities were “anonymized” to protect customer privacy. The MAD was also validated for completeness using the Emergency Service List (a list of telephone land line addresses) from Verizon.The MAD contains both tabular and spatial data, with addresses being mapped as point features. At present, the MAD contains 3.2 million address records and 2.2 million address points. As the database is very dynamic with changes being made daily, the data available for download will be refreshed weekly.A Statewide Addressing Standard for Municipalities is another useful asset that has been created as part of this ongoing project. It is a best practices guide for the creation and storage of addresses for Massachusetts Municipalities.Points features with each point having an address to the building/floor/unit level, when that information is available. Where more than one address is located at a single location multiple points are included (i.e. "stacked points"). The points for the most part represent building centroids. Other points are located as assessor parcel centroids.Points will display at scales 1:75,000 and closer.MassGIS' service does not contain points for Boston; they may be accessed at https://data.boston.gov/dataset/live-street-address-management-sam-addresses/resource/873a7659-68b6-4ac0-98b7-6d8af762b6f1.More details about the MAD and Master Address Points.Map service also available.

  11. U.S. Massachusetts poverty rate 2000-2023

    • statista.com
    Updated Oct 15, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). U.S. Massachusetts poverty rate 2000-2023 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/205475/poverty-rate-in-massachusetts/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Oct 15, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    In 2023, approximately 10.4 percent of Massachusetts' population lived below the poverty line. This accounts for persons or families whose collective income in the preceding 12 months was below the national poverty level of the United States.

  12. Most populated cities in the U.S. - median household income 2022

    • statista.com
    Updated Aug 30, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). Most populated cities in the U.S. - median household income 2022 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/205609/median-household-income-in-the-top-20-most-populated-cities-in-the-us/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Aug 30, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Time period covered
    2022
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    In 2022, San Francisco had the highest median household income of cities ranking within the top 25 in terms of population, with a median household income in of 136,692 U.S. dollars. In that year, San Jose in California was ranked second, and Seattle, Washington third.

    Following a fall after the great recession, median household income in the United States has been increasing in recent years. As of 2022, median household income by state was highest in Maryland, Washington, D.C., Utah, and Massachusetts. It was lowest in Mississippi, West Virginia, and Arkansas. Families with an annual income of 25,000 and 49,999 U.S. dollars made up the largest income bracket in America, with about 25.26 million households.

    Data on median household income can be compared to statistics on personal income in the U.S. released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Personal income rose to around 21.8 trillion U.S. dollars in 2022, the highest value recorded. Personal income is a measure of the total income received by persons from all sources, while median household income is “the amount with divides the income distribution into two equal groups,” according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Half of the population in question lives above median income and half lives below. Though total personal income has increased in recent years, this wealth is not distributed throughout the population. In practical terms, income of most households has decreased. One additional statistic illustrates this disparity: for the lowest quintile of workers, mean household income has remained more or less steady for the past decade at about 13 to 16 thousand constant U.S. dollars annually. Meanwhile, income for the top five percent of workers has actually risen from about 285,000 U.S. dollars in 1990 to about 499,900 U.S. dollars in 2020.

  13. m

    Data from: Assisted Living Residences

    • mass.gov
    Updated Nov 23, 2011
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Executive Office of Aging & Independence (AGE) (2011). Assisted Living Residences [Dataset]. https://www.mass.gov/assisted-living-residences
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Nov 23, 2011
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Executive Office of Aging & Independence (AGE)
    Area covered
    Massachusetts
    Description

    Certified by the Executive Office of Aging & Independence, Assisted Living Residences (ALRs) are private residences that offer, for a monthly fee, housing, meals, and personal care services to aging adults who live independently.

  14. m

    Birth Outcomes Data of Massachusetts Residents

    • mass.gov
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Population Health Information Tool, Birth Outcomes Data of Massachusetts Residents [Dataset]. https://www.mass.gov/info-details/birth-outcomes-data-of-massachusetts-residents
    Explore at:
    Dataset provided by
    Population Health Information Tool
    Department of Public Health
    Area covered
    Massachusetts
    Description

    Find data on births of Massachusetts residents. Information is obtained from birth certificates received by the Registry of Vital Records and Statistics.

  15. 2015 State Geodatabase for Massachusetts

    • data.wu.ac.at
    html, pdf, zip
    Updated Dec 7, 2015
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    US Census Bureau, Department of Commerce (2015). 2015 State Geodatabase for Massachusetts [Dataset]. https://data.wu.ac.at/schema/data_gov/MjA0N2RhMWMtYmJkNi00NjUzLTk2NGMtYjkxZjQxNjkzZmRj
    Explore at:
    zip, html, pdfAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Dec 7, 2015
    Dataset provided by
    United States Department of Commercehttp://commerce.gov/
    United States Census Bureauhttp://census.gov/
    License

    U.S. Government Workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
    License information was derived automatically

    Area covered
    86ed8635dff7dbedd152df8083dd62dfb8608937
    Description

    The 2015 TIGER Geodatabases are extracts of selected nation based and state based geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File/Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) database. The geodatabases include feature class layers of information for the fifty states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Island areas (American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the United States Virgin Islands). The geodatabases do not contain any sensitive data. The 2015 TIGER Geodatabases are designed for use with Esriâ s ArcGIS.

            The 2015 State Geodatabase for Massachusetts geodatabase contains multiple layers. These layers are the Block, Block Group, Census Designated Place, Census Tract, County Subdivision and
            Incorporated Place layers.
    
            Block Groups (BGs) are clusters of blocks within the same census tract. Each census tract contains at least one BG, and BGs are uniquely numbered
            within census tracts. BGs have a valid code range of 0 through 9. BGs have the same first digit of their 4-digit census block number from the same
            decennial census. For example, tabulation blocks numbered 3001, 3002, 3003,.., 3999 within census tract 1210.02 are also within BG 3 within that
            census tract. BGs coded 0 are intended to only include water area, no land area, and they are generally in territorial seas, coastal water, and
            Great Lakes water areas. Block groups generally contain between 600 and 3,000 people. A BG usually covers a contiguous area but never crosses
            county or census tract boundaries. They may, however, cross the boundaries of other geographic entities like county subdivisions, places, urban
            areas, voting districts, congressional districts, and American Indian / Alaska Native / Native Hawaiian areas. 
    
            The BG boundaries in this release are those that were delineated as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP) for the
            2010 Census. 
    
            The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to
            previous decennial censuses. Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people.
            When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living
            conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by
            highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to
            population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable
            features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some States and situations to
            allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and
            county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may
            consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities
            that are themselves noncontiguous. For the 2010 Census, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that
            include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American
            Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little
            or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial
            park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area. 
    
            An incorporated place is established to provide governmental functions for a concentration of people as opposed to a minor civil division (MCD),
            which generally is created to provide services or administer an area without regard, necessarily, to population. Places always nest within a state,
            but may extend across county and county subdivision boundaries. An incorporated place usually is a city, town, village, or borough, but can have
            other legal descriptions. CDPs are delineated for the decennial census as the statistical counterparts of incorporated places. CDPs are delineated
            to provide data for settled concentrations of population that are identifiable by name, but are not legally incorporated under the laws of the state
            in which they are located. The boundaries for CDPs often are defined in partnership with state, local, and/or tribal officials and usually coincide
            with visible features or the boundary of an adjacent incorporated place or another legal entity. CDP boundaries often change from one decennial
            census to the next with changes in the settlement pattern and development; a CDP with the same name as in an earlier census does not necessarily
            have the same boundary. The only population/housing size requirement for CDPs is that they must contain some housing and population. 
    
            The boundaries of most incorporated places in this shapefile are as of January 1, 2013, as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and
            Annexation Survey (BAS). Limited updates that occurred after January 1, 2013, such as newly incorporated places, are also included. The boundaries
            of all CDPs were delineated as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP) for the 2010 Census.
    
            The primary legal divisions of most states are termed counties. In Louisiana, these divisions are known as parishes. In Alaska, which has no
            counties, the equivalent entities are the organized boroughs, city and boroughs, municipalities, and for the unorganized area, census areas. The
            latter are delineated cooperatively for statistical purposes by the State of Alaska and the Census Bureau. In four states (Maryland, Missouri,
            Nevada, and Virginia), there are one or more incorporated places that are independent of any county organization and thus constitute primary
            divisions of their states. These incorporated places are known as independent cities and are treated as equivalent entities for purposes of data
            presentation. The District of Columbia and Guam have no primary divisions, and each area is considered an equivalent entity for purposes of data
            presentation. The Census Bureau treats the following entities as equivalents of counties for purposes of data presentation: Municipios in Puerto
            Rico, Districts and Islands in American Samoa, Municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Islands in the U.S. Virgin
            Islands. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas is covered by counties or equivalent entities. 
    
            The boundaries for counties and equivalent entities are mostly as of January 1, 2013, primarily as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and
            Annexation Survey (BAS). However, some changes made after January 2013, including the addition and deletion of counties, are included.
    
            County subdivisions are the primary divisions of counties and their equivalent entities for the reporting of Census Bureau data. They include
            legally-recognized minor civil divisions (MCDs) and statistical census county divisions (CCDs), and unorganized territories. For the 2010 Census,
            the MCDs are the primary governmental and/or administrative divisions of counties in 29 States and Puerto Rico; Tennessee changed from having CCDs
            for Census 2000 to having MCDs for the 2010 Census. In MCD States where no MCD exists or is not defined, the Census Bureau creates statistical
            unorganized territories to complete coverage. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas are covered by county
            subdivisions. The boundaries of most legal MCDs are as of January 1, 2013, as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and Annexation Survey
            (BAS). 
    
            The boundaries of all CCDs, delineated in 21 states, are those as reported as part of the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program
            (PSAP) for the 2010 Census.
    
  16. O

    Municipal Wastewater COVID19 Sampling Data 10/1/2020-6/30/2022

    • data.cambridgema.gov
    csv, xlsx, xml
    Updated Jul 7, 2022
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Cambridge Public Health Department (2022). Municipal Wastewater COVID19 Sampling Data 10/1/2020-6/30/2022 [Dataset]. https://data.cambridgema.gov/widgets/ayt4-g2ye?mobile_redirect=true
    Explore at:
    xlsx, xml, csvAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Jul 7, 2022
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Cambridge Public Health Department
    License

    ODC Public Domain Dedication and Licence (PDDL) v1.0http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/1.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    This dataset is no longer being updated as of 6/30/2022. It is being retained on the Open Data Portal for its potential historical interest.

    In November 2020, the City of Cambridge began collecting and analyzing COVID-19 data from municipal wastewater, which can serve as an early indicator of increased COVID-19 infections in the city. The Cambridge Public Health Department and Cambridge Department of Public Works are using technology developed by Biobot, a Cambridge based company, and partnering with the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA). This Cambridge wastewater surveillance initiative is funded through a $175,000 appropriation from the Cambridge City Council.

    This dataset indicates the presence of the COVID-19 virus (measured as viral RNA particles from the novel coronavirus per ml) in municipal wastewater. The Cambridge site data here were collected as a 24-hour composite sample, which is taken weekly. The MWRA site data ere were collected as a 24-hour composite sample, which is taken daily. MWRA and Cambridge data are listed here in a single table.

    An interactive graph of this data is available here: https://cityofcambridge.shinyapps.io/COVID19/?tab=wastewater

    All areas within the City of Cambridge are captured across four separate catchment areas (or sewersheds) as indicated on the map viewable here: https://cityofcambridge.shinyapps.io/COVID19/_w_484790f7/BioBot_Sites.png. The North and West Cambridge sample also includes nearly all of Belmont and very small areas of Arlington and Somerville (light yellow). The remaining collection sites are entirely -- or almost entirely -- drawn from Cambridge households and workplaces.

    Data are corrected for wastewater flow rate, which adjusts for population in general. Data listed are expected to reflect the burden of COVID-19 infections within each of the four sewersheds. A lag of approximately 4-7 days will occur before new transmissions captured in wastewater data would result in a positive PCR test for COVID-19, the most common testing method used. While this wastewater surveillance tool can provide an early indication of major changes in transmission within the community, it remains an emerging technology. In assessing community transmission, wastewater surveillance data should only be considered in conjunction with other clinical measures, such as current infection rates and test positivity.

    Each location is selected because it reflects input from a distinct catchment area (or sewershed) as identified on the color-coded map. Viral data collected from small catchment areas like these four Cambridge sites are more variable than data collected from central collection points (e.g., the MWRA facility on Deer Island) where wastewater from dozens of communities are joined and mixed. Data from each catchment area will be impacted by daily activity among individuals living in that area (e.g., working from home vs. traveling to work) and by daytime activities that are not from residences (businesses, schools, etc.) As such, the Regional MWRA data provides a more stable measure of regional viral counts. COVID wastewater data for Boston North and Boston South regions is available at https://www.mwra.com/biobot/biobotdata.htm

  17. M

    Morocco MA: Population in Largest City

    • ceicdata.com
    Updated Feb 15, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    CEICdata.com (2025). Morocco MA: Population in Largest City [Dataset]. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/morocco/population-and-urbanization-statistics/ma-population-in-largest-city
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Feb 15, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    CEICdata.com
    License

    Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Time period covered
    Dec 1, 2006 - Dec 1, 2017
    Area covered
    Morocco
    Variables measured
    Population
    Description

    Morocco MA: Population in Largest City data was reported at 3,653,152.000 Person in 2017. This records an increase from the previous number of 3,622,989.000 Person for 2016. Morocco MA: Population in Largest City data is updated yearly, averaging 2,596,373.500 Person from Dec 1960 (Median) to 2017, with 58 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 3,653,152.000 Person in 2017 and a record low of 966,796.000 Person in 1960. Morocco MA: Population in Largest City data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Morocco – Table MA.World Bank: Population and Urbanization Statistics. Population in largest city is the urban population living in the country's largest metropolitan area.; ; United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects.; ;

  18. TIGER/Line Shapefile, Current, State, Massachusetts, Census Tract

    • catalog.data.gov
    Updated Dec 15, 2023
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Geospatial Products Branch (Point of Contact) (2023). TIGER/Line Shapefile, Current, State, Massachusetts, Census Tract [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/tiger-line-shapefile-current-state-massachusetts-census-tract
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Dec 15, 2023
    Dataset provided by
    United States Census Bureauhttp://census.gov/
    Area covered
    Massachusetts
    Description

    This resource is a member of a series. The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses. Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some States and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous. For the 2010 Census, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area.

  19. TIGER/Line Shapefile, 2022, State, Massachusetts, MA, Census Tract

    • catalog.data.gov
    • res1catalogd-o-tdatad-o-tgov.vcapture.xyz
    Updated Jan 27, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division, Spatial Data Collection and Products Branch (Point of Contact) (2024). TIGER/Line Shapefile, 2022, State, Massachusetts, MA, Census Tract [Dataset]. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/tiger-line-shapefile-2022-state-massachusetts-ma-census-tract
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jan 27, 2024
    Dataset provided by
    United States Census Bureauhttp://census.gov/
    United States Department of Commercehttp://commerce.gov/
    Area covered
    Massachusetts
    Description

    The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. Census tracts are small, relatively permanent statistical subdivisions of a county or equivalent entity, and were defined by local participants as part of the 2020 Census Participant Statistical Areas Program. The Census Bureau delineated the census tracts in situations where no local participant existed or where all the potential participants declined to participate. The primary purpose of census tracts is to provide a stable set of geographic units for the presentation of census data and comparison back to previous decennial censuses. Census tracts generally have a population size between 1,200 and 8,000 people, with an optimum size of 4,000 people. When first delineated, census tracts were designed to be homogeneous with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living conditions. The spatial size of census tracts varies widely depending on the density of settlement. Physical changes in street patterns caused by highway construction, new development, and so forth, may require boundary revisions. In addition, census tracts occasionally are split due to population growth, or combined as a result of substantial population decline. Census tract boundaries generally follow visible and identifiable features. They may follow legal boundaries such as minor civil division (MCD) or incorporated place boundaries in some States and situations to allow for census tract-to-governmental unit relationships where the governmental boundaries tend to remain unchanged between censuses. State and county boundaries always are census tract boundaries in the standard census geographic hierarchy. In a few rare instances, a census tract may consist of noncontiguous areas. These noncontiguous areas may occur where the census tracts are coextensive with all or parts of legal entities that are themselves noncontiguous. For the 2010 Census, the census tract code range of 9400 through 9499 was enforced for census tracts that include a majority American Indian population according to Census 2000 data and/or their area was primarily covered by federally recognized American Indian reservations and/or off-reservation trust lands; the code range 9800 through 9899 was enforced for those census tracts that contained little or no population and represented a relatively large special land use area such as a National Park, military installation, or a business/industrial park; and the code range 9900 through 9998 was enforced for those census tracts that contained only water area, no land area.

  20. m

    Massachusetts arbovirus update

    • mass.gov
    Updated Sep 12, 2019
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Bureau of Infectious Disease and Laboratory Sciences (2019). Massachusetts arbovirus update [Dataset]. https://www.mass.gov/info-details/massachusetts-arbovirus-update
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Sep 12, 2019
    Dataset provided by
    Bureau of Infectious Disease and Laboratory Sciences
    Department of Public Health
    Area covered
    Massachusetts
    Description

    Find local risk levels for Eastern Equine Encephalitis (EEE) and West Nile Virus (WNV) based on seasonal testing from June to October.

Share
FacebookFacebook
TwitterTwitter
Email
Click to copy link
Link copied
Close
Cite
Statista (2025). Cost of living index in the U.S. 2024, by state [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1240947/cost-of-living-index-usa-by-state/
Organization logo

Cost of living index in the U.S. 2024, by state

Explore at:
2 scholarly articles cite this dataset (View in Google Scholar)
Dataset updated
May 27, 2025
Dataset authored and provided by
Statistahttp://statista.com/
Time period covered
2024
Area covered
United States
Description

West Virginia and Kansas had the lowest cost of living across all U.S. states, with composite costs being half of those found in Hawaii. This was according to a composite index that compares prices for various goods and services on a state-by-state basis. In West Virginia, the cost of living index amounted to **** — well below the national benchmark of 100. Virginia— which had an index value of ***** — was only slightly above that benchmark. Expensive places to live included Hawaii, Massachusetts, and California. Housing costs in the U.S. Housing is usually the highest expense in a household’s budget. In 2023, the average house sold for approximately ******* U.S. dollars, but house prices in the Northeast and West regions were significantly higher. Conversely, the South had some of the least expensive housing. In West Virginia, Mississippi, and Louisiana, the median price of the typical single-family home was less than ******* U.S. dollars. That makes living expenses in these states significantly lower than in states such as Hawaii and California, where housing is much pricier. What other expenses affect the cost of living? Utility costs such as electricity, natural gas, water, and internet also influence the cost of living. In Alaska, Hawaii, and Connecticut, the average monthly utility cost exceeded *** U.S. dollars. That was because of the significantly higher prices for electricity and natural gas in these states.

Search
Clear search
Close search
Google apps
Main menu