Dataset extracted from the post Nifty Today,16 Oct 2025 – Resistance, Supports and Sector Performance on Smart Investello.

This table shows ATCEMS fiscal year performance data that supports the ATCEMS annual report.

Dataset extracted from the post Nifty 50 Prediction for 24, 25, 26, 27 & 28 November with Trends, Resistances and Weekly Performance on Smart Investello.

Context

This dataset was built as a supplementary to "[European Soccer Database][1]". It includes data dictionary, extraction of detailed match information previously contains in XML columns.

Content

• PositionReference.csv: A reference of position x, y and map them to actual position in a play court.
• DataDictionary.xlsx: Data dictionary for all XML columns in "Match" data table.
• card_detail.csv: Detailed XML information extracted form "card" column in "Match" data table.
• corner_detail.csv: Detailed XML information extracted form "corner" column in "Match" data table.
• cross_detail.csv: Detailed XML information extracted form "cross" column in "Match" data table.
• foulcommit_detail.csv: Detailed XML information extracted form "foulcommit" column in "Match" data table.
• goal_detail.csv: Detailed XML information extracted form "goal" column in "Match" data table.
• possession_detail.csv: Detailed XML information extracted form "possession" column in "Match" data table.
• shotoff_detail.csv: Detailed XML information extracted form "shotoffl" column in "Match" data table.
• shoton_detail.csv: Detailed XML information extracted form "shoton" column in "Match" data table.

Acknowledgements

Original data comes from [European Soccer Database][1] by Hugo Mathien. I personally thank him for all his efforts.

Inspiration

Since this is a open dataset with no specific goals / objectives, I would like to explore the following aspects by data analytics / data mining:

1. Team statistics Including overall team ranking, team points, winning possibility, team lineup, etc. Mostly descriptive analysis.
2. Team Transferring Track and study team players transferring in the market. Study team's strength and weakness, construct models to suggest best fit players to the team.
3. Player Statistics Summarize player's performance (goal, assist, cross, corner, pass, block, etc). Identify key factors of players by position. Based on these factors, evaluate player's characteristics.
4. Player Evolution Construct model to predict player's rating of future.
5. New Player's Template Identify template and model player for young players cater to their positions and characteristics.
6. Market Value Prediction Predict player's market value based on player's capacity and performance.
7. The Winning Eleven Given a season / league / other criteria, propose the best 11 players as a team based on their capacity and performance.

Analysis-ready tabular data from "Predicting spatial-temporal patterns of diet quality and large herbivore performance using satellite time series" in Ecological Applications, Kearney et al., 2021. Data is tabular data only, summarized to the pasture scale. Weight gain data for individual cattle and the STARFM-derived Landsat-MODIS fusion imagery can be made available upon request. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Metadata - CSV column names, units and descriptions. File Name: Kearney_et_al_ECOLAPPL_Patterns of herbivore - metada.docxResource Description: Column names, units and descriptions for all CSV files in this datasetResource Title: Fecal quality data. File Name: Kearney_etal2021_Patterns_of_herbivore_Data_FQ_cln.csvResource Description: Field-sampled fecal quality (CP = crude protein; DOM = digestible organic matter) data and phenology-related APAR metrics derived from 30 m daily Landsat-MODIS fusion satellite imagery. All data are paddock-scale averages and the paddock is the spatial scale of replication and week is the temporal scale of replication. Fecal samples were collected by USDA-ARS staff from 3-5 animals per paddock (10% - 25% of animals in each herd) weekly during each grazing season from 2014 to 2019 across 10 different paddocks at the Central Plains Experimental Range (CPER) near Nunn, CO. Samples were analyzed at the Grazingland Animal Nutrition Lab (GANlab, https://cnrit.tamu.edu/index.php/ganlab/) using near infrared spectroscopy (see Lyons & Stuth, 1992; Lyons, Stuth, & Angerer, 1995). Not every herd was sampled every week or every year, resulting in a total of 199 samples. Samples represent all available data at the CPER during the study period and were collected for different research and adaptive management objectives, but following the basic protocol described above. APAR metrics were derived from the paddock-scale APAR daily time series (all paddock pixels averaged daily to create a single paddock-scale time series). All APAR metrics are calculated for the week that corresponds to the week that fecal quality samples were collected in the field. See Section 2.2.4 of the corresponding manuscript for a complete description of the APAR metrics. Resource Title: Monthly ADG. File Name: Kearney_etal2021_Patterns_of_herbivore_Data_ADG_monthly_cln.csvResource Description: Monthly average daily gain (ADG) of cattle weights at the paddock scale and the three satellite-derived metrics used to build regression model to predict AD: crude protein (CP), digestible organic matter (DOM) and aboveground net herbaceous production (ANHP). Data table also includes stocking rate (animal units per hectare) used as an interaction term in the ADG regression model and all associated data to derive each of these variables (e.g., sampling start and end dates, 30 m daily Landsat-MODIS fusion satellite imagery-derived APAR metrics, cattle weights, etc.). We calculated paddock-scale average daily gain (ADG, kg hd-1 day-1) from 2000-2019 for yearlings weighed approximately every 28-days during the grazing season across 6 different paddocks with stocking densities of 0.08 – 0.27 animal units (AU) ha-1, where one AU is equivalent to a 454 kg animal. It is worth noting that AU’s change as a function of both the number of cattle within a paddock and the size of individual animals, the latter of which changes within a single grazing season. This becomes important to consider when using sub-seasonal weight data for fast-growing yearlings. For paddock-scale ADG, we first calculated ADG for each individual yearling as the difference between the weights obtained at the end and beginning of each period, divided by the number of days in each period, and then averaged for all individuals in the paddock. We excluded data from 2013 due to data collection inconsistencies. We note that most of the monthly weight data (97%) is from 3 paddocks where cattle were weighed every year, whereas in the other 3 paddocks, monthly weights were only measured during 2017-2019. Apart from the 2013 data, which were not comparable to data from other years, the data represents all available weight gain data for CPER to maximize spatial-temporal coverage and avoid potential bias from subjective decisions to subset the data. Data may have been collected for different projects at different times, but was collected in a consistent way. This resulted in 269 paddock-scale estimates of monthly ADG, with robust temporal, but limited spatial, coverage. CP and DOM were estimated from a random forest model trained from the five APAR metrics: rAPAR, dAPAR, tPeak, iAPAR and iAPAR-dry (see manuscript Section 2.3 for description). APAR metrics were derived from the paddock-scale APAR daily time series (all paddock pixels averaged daily to create a single paddock-scale time series). All APAR metrics are calculated as the average of the approximately 28-day period that corresponds to the ADG calculation. See Section 2.2.4 of the manuscript for a complete description of the APAR metrics. ANHP was estimated from a linear regression model developed by Gaffney et al. (2018) to calculate net aboveground herbaceous productivity (ANHP; kg ha-1) from iAPAR. We averaged the coefficients of 4 spatial models (2013-2016) developed by Gaffney et al. (2018), resulting in the following equation: ANHP = -26.47 + 2.07(iAPAR) We first calculated ANHP for each day of the grazing season at the paddock scale, and then took the average ANHP for the 28-day period. REFERENCES: Gaffney, R., Porensky, L. M., Gao, F., Irisarri, J. G., Durante, M., Derner, J. D., & Augustine, D. J. (2018). Using APAR to predict aboveground plant productivity in semi-aid rangelands: Spatial and temporal relationships differ. Remote Sensing, 10(9). doi: 10.3390/rs10091474 Resource Title: Season-long ADG. File Name: Kearney_etal2021_Patterns_of_herbivore_Data_ADG_seasonal_cln.csvResource Description: Season-long observed and model-predicted average daily gain (ADG) of cattle weights at the paddock scale. Also includes two variables used to analyze patterns in model residuals: percent sand content and season-long aboveground net herbaceous production (ANHP). We calculated observed paddock-scale ADG for the entire grazing season from 2010-2019 (excluding 2013 due to data collection inconsistencies) by averaging seasonal ADG of each yearling, determined as the difference between the end and starting weights divided by the number of days in the grazing season. This dataset was available for 40 paddocks spanning a range of soil types, plant communities, and topographic positions. Data may have been collected for different projects at different times, but was collected in a consistent way. We note that there was spatial overlap among a small number paddock boundaries across different years since some fence lines were moved in 2012 and 2014. Model-predicted paddock-scale ADG was derived using the monthly ADG regression model described in Sections 2.3.3 and 2.3.4. of the associated manuscript. In short, we predicted season-long cattle weight gains by first predicting daily weight gain for each day of the grazing season from the monthly regression model using a 28-day moving average of model inputs (CP, DOM and ANHP ). We calculated the final ADG for the entire grazing season as the average predicted ADG, starting 28-days into the growing season. Percent sand content was obtained as the paddock-scale average of POLARIS sand content in the upper 0-30 cm. ANHP was calculated on the last day of the grazing season fusing a linear regression model developed by Gaffney et al. (2018) to calculate net aboveground herbaceous productivity (ANHP; kg ha-1) from satellite-derived integrated absorbed photosynthetically active radiation (iAPAR) (see Section 3.1.2 of the associated manuscript). We averaged the coefficients of 4 spatial models (2013-2016) developed by Gaffney et al. (2018), resulting in the following equation: ANHP = -26.47 + 2.07(iAPAR) REFERENCES: Gaffney, R., Porensky, L. M., Gao, F., Irisarri, J. G., Durante, M., Derner, J. D., & Augustine, D. J. (2018). Using APAR to predict aboveground plant productivity in semi-aid rangelands: Spatial and temporal relationships differ. Remote Sensing, 10(9). doi: 10.3390/rs10091474

Data table for the Civil Division Annual Survey (summary) performance measure.This dataset includes the average of the response rates of "Agree" or "Strongly Agree" for each question on the Civil Division Annual Survey regarding satisfaction with customer service in the areas of: timeliness, courtesy, communication, caring, ease of use, and resolution of the issue.This page provides data for the Civil Division Annual Survey performance measure.This data set includes the responses, categorized by question, for the Civil Division Annual Survey. Responses include, Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither Agree Nor Disagree, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree.The performance measure dashboard is available at 5.08 Civil Division Annual Survey.Additional InformationSource: Department annual surveyContact: Jenny ArmstrongContact E-Mail: Jenny_Armstrong@tempe.govData Source Type: ExcelPreparation Method: Surveys are tallied and the responses for each category are averaged to determine the aggregate effectiveness rate.Publish Frequency: AnnuallyPublish Method: ManualData Dictionary

BACKGROUND The data contained in the compressed file has been extracted from the Marketing Carrier On-Time Performance (Beginning January 2018) data table of the "On-Time" database from the TranStats data library. The time period is indicated in the name of the compressed file; for example, XXX_XXXXX_2001_1 contains data of the first month of the year 2001.

RECORD LAYOUT Below are fields in the order that they appear on the records: Year Year Quarter Quarter (1-4) Month Month DayofMonth Day of Month DayOfWeek Day of Week FlightDate Flight Date (yyyymmdd) Marketing_Airline_Network Unique Marketing Carrier Code. When the same code has been used by multiple carriers, a numeric suffix is used for earlier users, for example, PA, PA(1), PA(2). Use this field for analysis across a range of years. Operated_or_Branded_Code_Share_Partners Reporting Carrier Operated or Branded Code Share Partners DOT_ID_Marketing_Airline An identification number assigned by US DOT to identify a unique airline (carrier). A unique airline (carrier) is defined as one holding and reporting under the same DOT certificate regardless of its Code, Name, or holding company/corporation. IATA_Code_Marketing_Airline Code assigned by IATA and commonly used to identify a carrier. As the same code may have been assigned to different carriers over time, the code is not always unique. For analysis, use the Unique Carrier Code. Flight_Number_Marketing_Airline Flight Number Originally_Scheduled_Code_Share_Airline Unique Scheduled Operating Carrier Code. When the same code has been used by multiple carriers, a numeric suffix is used for earlier users,for example, PA, PA(1), PA(2). Use this field for analysis across a range of years. DOT_ID_Originally_Scheduled_Code_Share_Airline An identification number assigned by US DOT to identify a unique airline (carrier). A unique airline (carrier) is defined as one holding and reporting under the same DOT certificate regardless of its Code, Name, or holding company/corporation. IATA_Code_Originally_Scheduled_Code_Share_Airline Code assigned by IATA and commonly used to identify a carrier. As the same code may have been assigned to different carriers over time, the code is not always unique. For analysis, use the Unique Carrier Code. Flight_Num_Originally_Scheduled_Code_Share_Airline Flight Number Operating_Airline Unique Carrier Code. When the same code has been used by multiple carriers, a numeric suffix is used for earlier users, for example, PA, PA(1), PA(2). Use this field for analysis across a range of years. DOT_ID_Operating_Airline An identification number assigned by US DOT to identify a unique airline (carrier). A unique airline (carrier) is defined as one holding and reporting under the same DOT certificate regardless of its Code, Name, or holding company/corporation. IATA_Code_Operating_Airline Code assigned by IATA and commonly used to identify a carrier. As the same code may have been assigned to different carriers over time, the code is not always unique. For analysis, use the Unique Carrier Code. Tail_Number Tail Number Flight_Number_Operating_Airline Flight Number OriginAirportID Origin Airport, Airport ID. An identification number assigned by US DOT to identify a unique airport. Use this field for airport analysis across a range of years because an airport can change its airport code and airport codes can be reused. OriginAirportSeqID Origin Airport, Airport Sequence ID. An identification number assigned by US DOT to identify a unique airport at a given point of time. Airport attributes, such as airport name or coordinates, may change over time. OriginCityMarketID Origin Airport, City Market ID. City Market ID is an identification number assigned by US DOT to identify a city market. Use this field to consolidate airports serving the same city market. Origin Origin Airport OriginCityName Origin Airport, City Name OriginState Origin Airport, State Code OriginStateFips Origin Airport, State Fips OriginStateName Origin Airport, State Name OriginWac Origin Airport, World Area Code DestAirportID Destination Airport, Airport ID. An identification number assigned by US DOT to identify a unique airport. Use this field for airport analysis across a range of years because an airport can change its airport code and airport codes can be reused. DestAirportSeqID Destination Airport, Airport Sequence ID. An identification number assigned by US DOT to identify a unique airport at a given point of time. Airport attributes, such as airport name or coordinates, may change over time. DestCityMarketID Destination Airport, City Market ID. City Market ID is an identification number assigned by US DOT to identify a city market. Use this field to consolidate airports serving the same city market. Dest Destination Airport DestCityName Destination Airport, City Name DestState Destination Airport, State Code DestStateFips De...

This layer shows the population broken down by race and Hispanic origin. Data is from US Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates.To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right (in ArcGIS Online). A ‘Null’ entry in the estimate indicates that data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small (per the U.S. Census).Vintage: 2018-2022ACS Table(s): B03002 (Not all lines of this ACS table are available in this feature layer.)Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Data Preparation: Data table was downloaded and joined with Zip Code boundaries in the City of Tempe.Date of Census update: December 15, 2023National Figures: data.census.gov

The Buildings Performance Database (BPD) unlocks the power of building energy performance data. The platform enables users to perform statistical analysis on an anonymous dataset of tens of thousands of commercial and residential buildings from across the country. Users can compare performance trends among similar buildings to identify and prioritize cost-saving energy efficiency improvements and assess the range of likely savings from these improvements. Key Features - The BPD contains actual data on tens of thousands of existing buildings--not modeled data or anecdotal evidence. The BPD enables statistical analysis without revealing information about individual buildings. The BPD cleanses and validates data from many sources and translates it into a standard format. Analysis Tools - Peer Group Tool. Allows users to peruse the BPD and create peer groups based on specific building types, locations, sizes, ages, equipment and operational characteristics. Users can compare the energy use of their own building to a peer group of BPD buildings. Retrofit Analysis Tool. Allows users to analyze the savings potential of specific energy efficiency measures. Users can compare buildings that utilize one technology against peer buildings that utilize another. Coming Soon! Data Table Tool. Allows users to generate and export statistical data about peer groups. Financial Forecasting Tool. Forecasts cash flows for energy efficiency projects. Application Programming Interface (API). Allows external software to conduct analysis of the BPD data.

Dataset extracted from the post Nifty Sector Prediction for 24, 25, 26, 27 & 28 November with Trends Performance and Sector Strength on Smart Investello.

The dataset used in this study is primarily intended to investigate the effect of potassium (K) modification on the surface hydroxyl groups of Al₂O₃ catalysts and its regulation of Pt-Sn active sites, especially in the propane dehydrogenation reaction. The data mainly come from the preparation, characterization, and catalytic performance testing of the catalysts. In the experiment, PtSn-Kx/Al₂O₃ catalysts with different K loadings (0.3, 0.5, and 1.0 wt%) were prepared using the impregnation method. The dataset contains the physical, chemical, and catalytic performance data of the catalysts with different K loadings.Data Processing StepsCatalyst Preparation: The dataset records the process of loading K onto the Al₂O₃ surface using potassium acetate (CH₃COOK) as the K precursor. The precursor was dissolved in ethanol, and after ultrasonic treatment, drying, and calcination, catalysts with different K loadings were obtained.Catalyst Characterization: The physical and chemical properties of the catalysts were analyzed using various characterization techniques, including X-ray powder diffraction (XRD), nitrogen adsorption-desorption, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR), hydrogen temperature-programmed reduction (H₂-TPR), ammonia temperature-programmed desorption (NH₃-TPD), and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) to evaluate the catalyst structure, surface properties, and interactions with metal active sites.Catalytic Performance Testing: The catalytic performance of the catalysts was tested in a fixed-bed tubular reactor for propane dehydrogenation, recording the propane conversion and propene selectivity at 600°C.Data Content and Time/Space InformationTime: The dataset records the catalytic performance of the catalysts under different reaction conditions, especially in the propane dehydrogenation reaction. The time span of the data covers the preparation, characterization, and performance testing of the catalysts.Spatial Resolution: The physical properties of the catalysts, such as surface area and pore size, were measured using nitrogen adsorption-desorption; the particle size and metal dispersion were analyzed by transmission electron microscopy (TEM).Data Table Content and Measurement UnitsThe dataset includes tables of catalyst loadings (such as Pt, Sn, and K mass fractions), propane conversion, propene selectivity, and thermogravimetric analysis data. The measurement units used in the tables include mass fraction (wt%), temperature (°C), pressure (MPa), and reaction time (hours).

Marsh Distribution (2010)This dataset was created as part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office for Coastal Management's efforts to create an online mapping viewer depicting potential sea level rise and its associated impacts on the nation's coastal areas. The purpose of the mapping viewer is to provide coastal managers and scientists with a preliminary look at sea level rise and coastal flooding impacts. The viewer is a screening-level tool that uses nationally consistent data sets and analyses. Data and maps provided can be used at several scales to help gauge trends and prioritize actions for different scenarios. The purpose of this data is to highlight marsh type distribution. Tiles have been cached down to Level ID 15 (1:18,055). This initial (2010) land cover condition is derived from the Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP) land cover (http://www.coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/data/ccapregional/), and is dependent upon the accuracy of that classification. The dataset should be used only as a screening-level tool for management decisions. As with all remotely sensed data, all features should be verified with a site visit. The dataset is provided "as is," without warranty to its performance, merchantable state, or fitness for any particular purpose. The entire risk associated with the results and performance of this dataset is assumed by the user. This dataset should be used strictly as a planning reference and not for navigation, permitting, or other legal purposes. For more information visit the Sea Level Rise Impacts Viewer (http://coast.noaa.gov/slr).

This data indicates by calendar year the What Works Cities certification level achieved by the City of Tempe. Certification helps cities benchmark their progress and develop a roadmap for using data and evidence to deliver results for residents. This data table supports the Data-Driven Governance performance measure. The performance measure page is available at 3.35 Data-Driven Governance. Additional Information (pending)Source: Excel Contact (author): Stephanie DeitrickContact E-Mail (author): Stephanie_Deitrick@tempe.govContact (maintainer): Contact E-Mail (maintainer): Data Source Type: ExcelPreparation Method: ManualPublish Frequency: AnnualPublish Method: ManualData Dictionary

Dataset extracted from the post Nifty Outlook – 15th Oct 2025: Technical Levels & Sector Performance on Smart Investello.

This layer shows the population broken down by race and Hispanic origin. Data is from US Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates.To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right (in ArcGIS Online). A ‘Null’ entry in the estimate indicates that data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small (per the U.S. Census).Vintage: 2019-2023ACS Table(s): B03002 (Not all lines of this ACS table are available in this feature layer.)Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Data Preparation: Data table was downloaded and joined with Zip Code boundaries in the City of Tempe.Date of Census update: December 12, 2024National Figures: data.census.gov

Note: In these datasets, a person is defined as up to date if they have received at least one dose of an updated COVID-19 vaccine. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that certain groups, including adults ages 65 years and older, receive additional doses.

Starting on July 13, 2022, the denominator for calculating vaccine coverage has been changed from age 5+ to all ages to reflect new vaccine eligibility criteria. Previously the denominator was changed from age 16+ to age 12+ on May 18, 2021, then changed from age 12+ to age 5+ on November 10, 2021, to reflect previous changes in vaccine eligibility criteria. The previous datasets based on age 12+ and age 5+ denominators have been uploaded as archived tables.

Starting June 30, 2021, the dataset has been reconfigured so that all updates are appended to one dataset to make it easier for API and other interfaces. In addition, historical data has been extended back to January 5, 2021.

This dataset shows full, partial, and at least 1 dose coverage rates by zip code tabulation area (ZCTA) for the state of California. Data sources include the California Immunization Registry and the American Community Survey’s 2015-2019 5-Year data.

This is the data table for the LHJ Vaccine Equity Performance dashboard. However, this data table also includes ZTCAs that do not have a VEM score.

This dataset also includes Vaccine Equity Metric score quartiles (when applicable), which combine the Public Health Alliance of Southern California’s Healthy Places Index (HPI) measure with CDPH-derived scores to estimate factors that impact health, like income, education, and access to health care. ZTCAs range from less healthy community conditions in Quartile 1 to more healthy community conditions in Quartile 4.

The Vaccine Equity Metric is for weekly vaccination allocation and reporting purposes only. CDPH-derived quartiles should not be considered as indicative of the HPI score for these zip codes. CDPH-derived quartiles were assigned to zip codes excluded from the HPI score produced by the Public Health Alliance of Southern California due to concerns with statistical reliability and validity in populations smaller than 1,500 or where more than 50% of the population resides in a group setting.

These data do not include doses administered by the following federal agencies who received vaccine allocated directly from CDC: Indian Health Service, Veterans Health Administration, Department of Defense, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

For some ZTCAs, vaccination coverage may exceed 100%. This may be a result of many people from outside the county coming to that ZTCA to get their vaccine and providers reporting the county of administration as the county of residence, and/or the DOF estimates of the population in that ZTCA are too low. Please note that population numbers provided by DOF are projections and so may not be accurate, especially given unprecedented shifts in population as a result of the pandemic.

This layer contains information on technology access by Household. Data is from US Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates.This layer represents the underlying data for several data visualizations on the Tempe Equity Map.Data visualized as a percent of total population in households in given census tract.Layer includes:Key demographicsTotal Population in Households % Broadband Internet Subscription: American Indian and Alaska Native alone% Broadband Internet Subscription: Asian Alone% Broadband Internet Subscription: Black or African American alone% Broadband Internet Subscription: Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone% Broadband Internet Subscription: White Alone% Broadband Internet Subscription: Hispanic or Latino origin% Without an internet Subscription: American Indian and Alaska Native alone% Without an internet Subscription: Asian alone% Without an internet Subscription: Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone% Without an internet Subscription: Black or African American Alone% Without an internet Subscription: White Alone% Without an internet Subscription: Hispanic or Latino origin% No computer in household: American Indian and Alaska native alone% No computer in household: Asian alone% No computer in household: Black or African American alone% No computer in household: Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander% No computer in household: White Alone% No computer in household: Hispanic or Latino origin Current Vintage: 2019-2023ACS Table(s): S2802 (Not all lines of this ACS table are available in this feature layer.)Census API: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Date of Census update: Dec 12, 2024Data Preparation: Data table downloaded and joined with Census Tract boundaries that are within or adjacent to the City of Tempe boundaryNational Figures: data.census.gov

Dataset extracted from the post Nifty Sector Prediction for 24 to 31 October with Past Performance on Smart Investello.

Note: In these datasets, a person is defined as up to date if they have received at least one dose of an updated COVID-19 vaccine. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that certain groups, including adults ages 65 years and older, receive additional doses. Starting on July 13, 2022, the denominator for calculating vaccine coverage has been changed from age 5+ to all ages to reflect new vaccine eligibility criteria. Previously the denominator was changed from age 16+ to age 12+ on May 18, 2021, then changed from age 12+ to age 5+ on November 10, 2021, to reflect previous changes in vaccine eligibility criteria. The previous datasets based on age 12+ and age 5+ denominators have been uploaded as archived tables. Starting June 30, 2021, the dataset has been reconfigured so that all updates are appended to one dataset to make it easier for API and other interfaces. In addition, historical data has been extended back to January 5, 2021. This dataset shows full, partial, and at least 1 dose coverage rates by zip code tabulation area (ZCTA) for the state of California. Data sources include the California Immunization Registry and the American Community Survey’s 2015-2019 5-Year data. This is the data table for the LHJ Vaccine Equity Performance dashboard. However, this data table also includes ZTCAs that do not have a VEM score. This dataset also includes Vaccine Equity Metric score quartiles (when applicable), which combine the Public Health Alliance of Southern California’s Healthy Places Index (HPI) measure with CDPH-derived scores to estimate factors that impact health, like income, education, and access to health care. ZTCAs range from less healthy community conditions in Quartile 1 to more healthy community conditions in Quartile 4. The Vaccine Equity Metric is for weekly vaccination allocation and reporting purposes only. CDPH-derived quartiles should not be considered as indicative of the HPI score for these zip codes. CDPH-derived quartiles were assigned to zip codes excluded from the HPI score produced by the Public Health Alliance of Southern California due to concerns with statistical reliability and validity in populations smaller than 1,500 or where more than 50% of the population resides in a group setting. These data do not include doses administered by the following federal agencies who received vaccine allocated directly from CDC: Indian Health Service, Veterans Health Administration, Department of Defense, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. For some ZTCAs, vaccination coverage may exceed 100%. This may be a result of many people from outside the county coming to that ZTCA to get their vaccine and providers reporting the county of administration as the county of residence, and/or the DOF estimates of the population in that ZTCA are too low. Please note that population numbers provided by DOF are projections and so may not be accurate, especially given unprecedented shifts in population as a result of the pandemic.

Dataset extracted from the post Nifty Smallcap 250 : Prediction for 10th to 14th November 2025 with Factors Affecting it’s Performance on Smart Investello.