19 datasets found
  1. Opportunity Youth (by US Congress) 2019

    • arc-garc.opendata.arcgis.com
    • gisdata.fultoncountyga.gov
    • +2more
    Updated Mar 3, 2021
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Georgia Association of Regional Commissions (2021). Opportunity Youth (by US Congress) 2019 [Dataset]. https://arc-garc.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/opportunity-youth-by-us-congress-2019
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Mar 3, 2021
    Dataset provided by
    The Georgia Association of Regional Commissions
    Authors
    Georgia Association of Regional Commissions
    License

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

    Area covered
    Description

    This dataset was developed by the Research & Analytics Group at the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.Naming conventions:Prefixes: None Countp Percentr Ratem Mediana Mean (average)t Aggregate (total)ch Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)pch Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)chp Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)s Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% CI, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed Suffixes: _e19 Estimate from 2014-19 ACS_m19 Margin of Error from 2014-19 ACS_00_v19 Decennial 2000, re-estimated to 2019 geography_00_19 Change, 2000-19_e10_v19 2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2019 geography_m10_v19 Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2019 geography_e10_19 Change, 2010-19The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent. The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2015-2019). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available. For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Atlanta Regional CommissionDate: 2015-2019Data License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC by 4.0)Link to the manifest: https://www.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/3d489c725bb24f52a987b302147c46ee/data

  2. National Neighborhood Data Archive (NaNDA): Socioeconomic Status and...

    • icpsr.umich.edu
    • archive.icpsr.umich.edu
    ascii, delimited, r +3
    Updated Oct 27, 2025
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Clarke, Philippa; Melendez, Robert; Noppert, Grace; Chenoweth, Megan; Gypin, Lindsay (2025). National Neighborhood Data Archive (NaNDA): Socioeconomic Status and Demographic Characteristics of Census Tracts and ZIP Code Tabulation Areas, United States, 1990-2022 [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR38528.v6
    Explore at:
    spss, r, sas, ascii, stata, delimitedAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Oct 27, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Researchhttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/pages/
    Authors
    Clarke, Philippa; Melendez, Robert; Noppert, Grace; Chenoweth, Megan; Gypin, Lindsay
    License

    https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/38528/termshttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/38528/terms

    Time period covered
    1990 - 2022
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    These datasets contain measures of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics by U.S. census tract for the years 1990-2022 and ZIP code tabulation area (ZCTA) for the years 2008-2022. Example measures include population density; population distribution by race, ethnicity, age, and income; income inequality by race and ethnicity; and proportion of population living below the poverty level, receiving public assistance, and female-headed or single parent families with kids. The datasets also contain a set of theoretically derived measures capturing neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage and affluence, as well as a neighborhood index of Hispanic, foreign born, and limited English.

  3. a

    Youth (16 to 19 Years) Who are in School or Working by Census Tract

    • equity-indicators-kingcounty.hub.arcgis.com
    Updated May 2, 2023
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    King County (2023). Youth (16 to 19 Years) Who are in School or Working by Census Tract [Dataset]. https://equity-indicators-kingcounty.hub.arcgis.com/datasets/kingcounty::youth-16-to-19-years-who-are-in-school-or-working-by-census-tract/explore
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    May 2, 2023
    Dataset authored and provided by
    King County
    Area covered
    Description

    This layer contains details about youth (16 to 19 Years) who are in school or working in King County. This dataset has been developed for the Education presentation. It includes information about Youth and Young Adults (16 to 24 Years) who are in School or Working equity indicator(s). Fields describe all youth (16 to 19 Years) who are in school or working (Denominator), youth (16 to 19 Years) who are in school or working (Numerator), for King County (Group), and the value that describes this measurement (Indicator Value).The data for this dataset was compiled from the American Community Survey (ACS).B14005: SEX BY SCHOOL ENROLLMENT BY EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT BY EMPLOYMENT STATUS FOR THE POPULATION 16 TO 19 YEARSFor more information about King County's equity efforts, please see:Equity, Racial & Social Justice VisionOrdinance 16948 describing the determinants of equityDeterminants of Equity and Data Tool

  4. Opportunity Youth (by Census Tract) 2018

    • opendata.atlantaregional.com
    Updated Mar 4, 2020
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Georgia Association of Regional Commissions (2020). Opportunity Youth (by Census Tract) 2018 [Dataset]. https://opendata.atlantaregional.com/datasets/GARC::opportunity-youth-by-census-tract-2018/about
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Mar 4, 2020
    Dataset provided by
    The Georgia Association of Regional Commissions
    Authors
    Georgia Association of Regional Commissions
    License

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

    Area covered
    Description

    This layer was developed by the Research & Analytics Division of the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

    The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent.

    The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2014-2018). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available.

    For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.

    For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.

    Naming conventions:

    Prefixes:

    None

    Count

    p

    Percent

    r

    Rate

    m

    Median

    a

    Mean (average)

    t

    Aggregate (total)

    ch

    Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)

    pch

    Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)

    chp

    Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)

    s

    Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% Confidence Interval, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed

    Suffixes:

    _e18

    Estimate from 2014-18 ACS

    _m18

    Margin of Error from 2014-18 ACS

    _00_v18

    Decennial 2000 in 2018 geography boundary

    _00_18

    Change, 2000-18

    _e10_v18

    Estimate from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

    _m10_v18

    Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS in 2018 geography boundary

    _e10_18

    Change, 2010-18

  5. V

    HRTPO Transportation-Vulnerable Communities

    • data.virginia.gov
    • hrgeo.org
    • +1more
    Updated Aug 5, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Hampton Roads PDC & Hampton Roads TPO (2025). HRTPO Transportation-Vulnerable Communities [Dataset]. https://data.virginia.gov/dataset/hrtpo-transportation-vulnerable-communities
    Explore at:
    html, geojson, csv, kml, zip, arcgis geoservices rest apiAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Aug 5, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    HRPDC & HRTPO
    Authors
    Hampton Roads PDC & Hampton Roads TPO
    Description

    StoryMap link:https://arcg.is/1OXPW1

    This dataset contains the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (HRTPO) 9 Environmental Justice (EJ) Indicators (Carless Households, Cash Public Assistance Households, Disabled Population, Elderly Population, Female Head of Household, Food Stamps/SNAP Household, Limited English Proficiency Population, Minority Population, and Low-Income/Poverty Households) at the Census Block Group level. The U.S. Census data source uses the 2017-2021 ACS 5-Year Estimates. The dataset includes Youth Population, which is not an EJ Indicator but is used in the Transportation Challenges and Strategies Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) report. This data will be used for the HRTPO 2050 LRTP, for planning purposes only.

    Title VI - Environmental Justice Framework

    Applied to 2050 Long-Range Transportation Plan

    Introduction
    Providing equitable access to transportation is essential for thriving communities. Below are federal regulations to help foster transportation equity.
    Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.
    Environmental Justice (EJ) is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. The Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898, signed in 1994, reinforces the requirements of Title VI.
    Transportation-Vulnerability Key Indicators
    The following transportation-vulnerability key indicators were used to identify individuals or households that may experience varying degrees of disadvantage in transportation accessibility and/or the transportation planning process:
    • Minority
    • Low-Income Households
    • Households Receiving Cash Public Assistance
    • Households Receiving Food Stamps
    • Carless Households
    • Disabled Populations
    • Elderly Populations
    • Female Heads of Household
    • Limited English Proficiency Households
    Transportation-Vulnerable Communities
    Using US Census Bureau’s 2017-2021 American Community Survey data, each transportation-vulnerability key indicator was assessed by census block groups, the smallest available geography for the identified key indicators, and compared to regional averages. Any census block group with an average key indicator equal to or higher than the regional average for that indicator is identified as a transportation-vulnerable community.

    The dataset contains the 9 EJ Indicators used for the HRTPO Title VI/EJ Analysis and the 2050 LRTP. The field names/aliases will change based on what platform the user is viewing the data (e.g., ArcMap, ArcPro, ArcGIS Online, Microsoft Excel, etc.). The suggestion is to view 'Field Alias Names'. To help preserve the field names and descriptions and to help the user understand the data, the following list contains the field names, field alias names, and field descriptions: (EXAMPLE: Field Name = Field Alias Name. Field Description.).

    OBJECTID = OBJECTID. Unique integer field used to identify rows in tables in a geodatabase uniquely. ESRI ArcMap/ArcPro automatically defines this field.

    Shape = Shape. The type of shape for the data. In this case, the EJ data are all 2021 Census Block Group (CBG) polygons. ESRI ArcMap/ArcPro automatically defines this field.

    GEOID = Census GEOID. Census numeric codes that uniquely identify all administrative/legal and statistical geographic areas. In this case, the EJ data are all 2021 CBGs.

    GEOID_1 = Census GEOID - Joined. Census numeric codes that uniquely identify all administrative/legal and statistical geographic areas. In this case, the EJ data are all 2021 CBGs.

    Block_Grou = Census Block Group. CBG is a geographical unit used by the U.S. Census Bureau which is between the Census Tract and the Census Block levels.

    TAZ = Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZ). HRTPO Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs) that spatially join with the CBGs. Each CBG has a TAZ that intersects/overlays with the HRTPO TAZs.

    Locality = Locality. Locality name: the dataset includes 16 localities (Cities of Chesapeake, Franklin, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg, and the Counties of Gloucester, Isle of Wight, James City, Southampton, Surry*, and York). The HRTPO/MPO Boundary does not include Surry County, but the data is included for HRPDC/MPA purposes.

    Total_Popu = Total Population. Census Total Population.

    Total_Hous = Total Households. Census Total Households.

    Carless_To = Carless Total. Total Carless Households. Households with no vehicles available.

    Carless_Re = Carless regional Avg. Carless Households regional average.

    Carless_BG = Carless BG Avg. Carless Households Census Block Group average.

    Carless_AB = Carless Above Avg (Yes/No). Carless Households above the regional average. No = Not an EJ Community, Yes = EJ Community.

    Carless_Nu = Carless Numeric Value (0/1). Carless Households numerical value. 0 = Not an EJ Community, 1 = EJ Community.

    Cash_Assis = Cash Public Assistance Total. Total Households Receiving Cash Public Assistance (CPA). household that received either cash assistance or in-kind benefits.

    Cash_Ass_1 = Cash Public Assistance Regional Avg. CPA Households regional average.

    Cash_Ass_2 = Cash Public Assistance BG Avg. CPA Households Census Block Group average.

    Cash_Ass_3 = Cash Assistance Above Avg (Yes/No). CPA Households above the regional average. No = Not an EJ Community, Yes = EJ Community.

    CPA_Num = Cash Public Assistance Numeric Value (0/1). CPA Households numerical value. 0 = Not an EJ Community, 1 = EJ Community.

    Disability = Disability Total. Total Disabled Populations. non-institutionalized persons identified as having a disability of the following basic areas of functioning - hearing, vision, cognition, and ambulation.

    Disabili_1 = Disability Regional Avg. Disabled Populations regional average.

    Disabili_2 = Disability BG Average. Disabled Populations Census Block Group average.

    Disabili_3 = Disability Above Avg (Yes/No). Disabled Populations above the regional average. No = Not an EJ Community, Yes = EJ Community.

    Disabili_4 = Disability Numeric Value (0/1). Disabled Populations numerical value. 0 = Not an EJ Community, 1 = EJ Community.

    Elderly_To = Elderly Total. Total Elderly Populations. People who are aged 65 and older.

    Elderly_Re = Elderly Region Avg. Elderly Population regional average.

    Elderly_BG = Elderly BG Avg. Elderly Population Census Block Group avg.

    Elderly_Ab = Elderly Above Avg (Yes/No). Elderly Population above the regional average. No = Not an EJ Community, Yes = EJ Community.

    Elderly_Num = Elderly Numeric Value (0/1). Elderly Population numerical value. 0 = Not an EJ Community, 1 = EJ Community.

    Female_HoH = Female Head of Households Total. Total Female Head of Households. Households where females are the head of households with children present and no husband present.

    Female_H_1 = Female Head of Households Regional Avg. Female Head of Households regional average.

    Female_H_2 = Female Head of Households BG Avg. Female Head of Households Census Block Group average.

    Female_H_3 = Female Head of Households Above Avg (Yes/No). Female Head of Households above the regional average. No = Not an EJ Community, Yes = EJ Community.

    FemaleHoH_ = Female Head of Households Numeric Value (0/1). Female Head of Households numerical value. 0 = Not an EJ Community, 1 = EJ Community.

    Food_Stamp = Food Stamps Total. Total Households receiving Food Stamps. Households that received Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) or Food Stamps.

    Food_Sta_1 = Food Stamps Region Avg. Food Stamps Households regional average.

    Food_Sta_2 = Food Stamps BG Avg. Food Stamps Households Census Block Group average.

    Food_Sta_3 = Food Stamps Above Avg (Yes/No). Food Stamps Households above the regional average. No = Not an EJ Community, Yes = EJ Community.

    FoodStamps = Food Stamps Numeric Value (0/1). Food Stamps Households numerical value. 0 = Not an EJ Community, 1 = EJ Community.

    Limited_En = Limited English Proficiency Total. Total Limited English

  6. Opportunity Youth (by Census Tract) 2017

    • opendata.atlantaregional.com
    Updated Jun 26, 2019
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Georgia Association of Regional Commissions (2019). Opportunity Youth (by Census Tract) 2017 [Dataset]. https://opendata.atlantaregional.com/datasets/opportunity-youth-by-census-tract-2017/api
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jun 26, 2019
    Dataset provided by
    The Georgia Association of Regional Commissions
    Authors
    Georgia Association of Regional Commissions
    License

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

    Area covered
    Description

    This layer was developed by the Research & Analytics Group of the Atlanta Regional Commission, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey 5-year estimates for 2013-2017, to show the number and percentages of opportunity to youth by census tract in the Atlanta region.

    The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent.

    The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2013-2017). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available.

    For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.

    Naming conventions:

    Prefixes:

    None

    Count

    p

    Percent

    r

    Rate

    m

    Median

    a

    Mean (average)

    t

    Aggregate (total)

    ch

    Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)

    pch

    Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)

    chp

    Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)

    Suffixes:

    None

    Change over two periods

    _e

    Estimate from most recent ACS

    _m

    Margin of Error from most recent ACS

    _00

    Decennial 2000

    Attributes:

    SumLevel

    Summary level of geographic unit (e.g., County, Tract, NSA, NPU, DSNI, SuperDistrict, etc)

    GEOID

    Census tract Federal Information Processing Series (FIPS) code

    NAME

    Name of geographic unit

    Planning_Region

    Planning region designation for ARC purposes

    Acres

    Total area within the tract (in acres)

    SqMi

    Total area within the tract (in square miles)

    County

    County identifier (combination of Federal Information Processing Series (FIPS) codes for state and county)

    CountyName

    County Name

    PopAges1619_e

    # Population, ages 16-19, 2017

    PopAges1619_m

    # Population, ages 16-19, 2017 (MOE)

    DisconYouth_e

    # Disconnected youth: ages 16-19 not in school or in labor force, 2017

    DisconYouth_m

    # Disconnected youth: ages 16-19 not in school or in labor force, 2017 (MOE)

    pDisconYouth_e

    % Disconnected youth: ages 16-19 not in school or in labor force, 2017

    pDisconYouth_m

    % Disconnected youth: ages 16-19 not in school or in labor force, 2017 (MOE)

    OwnChildInFam_e

    # Own children in families, 2017

    OwnChildInFam_m

    # Own children in families, 2017 (MOE)

    NoParentLabForce_e

    # Own children in families with no parent in the labor force, 2017

    NoParentLabForce_m

    # Own children in families with no parent in the labor force, 2017 (MOE)

    pNoParentLabForce_e

    % Own children in families with no parent in the labor force, 2017

    pNoParentLabForce_m

    % Own children in families with no parent in the labor force, 2017 (MOE)

    last_edited_date

    Last date the feature was edited by ARC

    Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Atlanta Regional Commission

    Date: 2013-2017

    For additional information, please visit the Census ACS website.

  7. The Opportunity Atlas

    • redivis.com
    application/jsonl +7
    Updated Apr 22, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Stanford Center for Population Health Sciences (2020). The Opportunity Atlas [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.57761/aw9b-jd83
    Explore at:
    arrow, spss, stata, avro, csv, sas, application/jsonl, parquetAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Apr 22, 2020
    Dataset provided by
    Redivis Inc.
    Authors
    Stanford Center for Population Health Sciences
    Description

    Abstract

    The Opportunity Atlas has collected contextual data by county and tract. Rather than providing contextual socioeconomic data of where people currently live, the data represents average socioeconomic indicators (e.g., earnings) of where people grew up.

    Documentation

    A core element of Population Health Science is that health outcomes can only be fully understood when they are studied within their context. Therefore, we have a copy of The Opportunity Atlas, a dataset that provides socioeconomic data by county and tract.

    Several studies have shown that especially childhood neighborhoods drive adult outcomes and that residential areas lived in through adulthood have much smaller effects. The focus of the Opportunity Atlas is therefore on contextual data of where people grew up:

    %3E Traditional measures of poverty and neighborhood conditions provide snapshots of income and other variables for residents in an area at a given point in time. But to study how economic opportunity varies across neighborhoods, we really need to follow people over many years and see how one’s outcomes depend upon family circumstances and where on grew up. The Opportunity Atlas is the first dataset that provides such longitudinal information at a detailed neighborhood level. Using the Atlas, you can see not just where the rich and poor currently live – which was possible in previously available data from the Census Bureau – but whether children in a given area tend to grow up to become rich of poor. This focus on mobility out of poverty across generations allows us to trace the roots of outcomes such as poverty and incarceration back to where kids grew up, potentially permitting much more effective interventions.

    As such, The Opportunity Atlas data provides a rich source of data for researchers who wish to overlay health data with contextual data.

    Methodology

    Three sources of Census Bureau are linked to compute the data

    1. The 2000 and 2010 Decennial Census short form
    2. Federal income tax returns for 1989, 1994, 1995, 1998-2015
    3. The 2000 Decennial Census long form and the 2005-2015 American Community Surveys (ACS).

    %3C!-- --%3E

    20.5 million Americans born between 1987-1983 are sampled from these data and mapped back to the Census tracts they lived in through age 23. After that step, a range of outcomes are then estimated for each of the 70,000 tracts. In order to comply with federal data disclosure standards and protect the privacy of individuals no estimates in tracts with 20 or fewer children are published and noise (small random numbers) is added to all the estimates.

    For more information on the data collection and methodology, please visit:

    Website

    Documentation

    Data availability

    Some variables are available for counties only. The table below gives you an overview. Open the table in a new tab for a larger view.

    https://redivis.com/fileUploads/ee6544ef-e1b1-473d-a75d-36618c91f4a5%3E" alt="data availability.png">

  8. a

    Community Explorer ACS Tract Data

    • maps-semcog.opendata.arcgis.com
    Updated Apr 10, 2025
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (2025). Community Explorer ACS Tract Data [Dataset]. https://maps-semcog.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/community-explorer-acs-tract-data
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Apr 10, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Southeast Michigan Council of Governments
    Area covered
    Description

    SEMCOG's Community Explorer tool is great for dynamically visualizing demographic and economic data in Southeast Michigan. Use this dataset to extend Community Explorer and make your own visualization.This tool has over 40 indicators across 4 geography types (County, Community, School Districts, Census Tracts). Not only are the data columns available, but we also include the Margin of Error (MOE) to better understand the reliability of each column.IndicatorsTotal PopulationPopulation Density (Persons/Acre)Median AgePercent Age 65+Percent Age 65+ Living AlonePercent Ages 5 to 17Ratio Youth to SeniorsPercent Bachelor's Degree or HigherPercent People in PovertyPercent AsianPercent BlackPercent HispanicPercent WhiteTotal HouseholdsAverage Household SizePercent Households with SeniorsPercent Households with ChildrenPercent Households with No CarPercent Households with Internet AccessTotal Households without Internet AccessPercent Households with Broadband Internet AccessTotal Households without Broadband Internet AccessPercentage Households with Computing DevicesTotal Households without a Desktop or LaptopPercent Seniors with Broadband Internet AccessPercent Children without Broadband Internet AccessPercent Children without Computing DevicesTotal Housing UnitsPercent VacantPercent Owner OccupiedPercent Renter OccupiedPercent Single FamilyPercent Multi-FamilyTotal JobsJob Density (Jobs/Acre)Unemployment RateLabor Force Participation RateMedian Household IncomePer Capita IncomeMedian Housing ValueAverage Commute Time (Minutes)Percent Drive Alone to WorkPercent Commute by Transit

  9. d

    U.S. Voting by Census Block Groups

    • search.dataone.org
    Updated Oct 29, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Bryan, Michael (2025). U.S. Voting by Census Block Groups [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NKNWBX
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Oct 29, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    Harvard Dataverse
    Authors
    Bryan, Michael
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    PROBLEM AND OPPORTUNITY In the United States, voting is largely a private matter. A registered voter is given a randomized ballot form or machine to prevent linkage between their voting choices and their identity. This disconnect supports confidence in the election process, but it provides obstacles to an election's analysis. A common solution is to field exit polls, interviewing voters immediately after leaving their polling location. This method is rife with bias, however, and functionally limited in direct demographics data collected. For the 2020 general election, though, most states published their election results for each voting location. These publications were additionally supported by the geographical areas assigned to each location, the voting precincts. As a result, geographic processing can now be applied to project precinct election results onto Census block groups. While precinct have few demographic traits directly, their geographies have characteristics that make them projectable onto U.S. Census geographies. Both state voting precincts and U.S. Census block groups: are exclusive, and do not overlap are adjacent, fully covering their corresponding state and potentially county have roughly the same size in area, population and voter presence Analytically, a projection of local demographics does not allow conclusions about voters themselves. However, the dataset does allow statements related to the geographies that yield voting behavior. One could say, for example, that an area dominated by a particular voting pattern would have mean traits of age, race, income or household structure. The dataset that results from this programming provides voting results allocated by Census block groups. The block group identifier can be joined to Census Decennial and American Community Survey demographic estimates. DATA SOURCES The state election results and geographies have been compiled by Voting and Election Science team on Harvard's dataverse. State voting precincts lie within state and county boundaries. The Census Bureau, on the other hand, publishes its estimates across a variety of geographic definitions including a hierarchy of states, counties, census tracts and block groups. Their definitions can be found here. The geometric shapefiles for each block group are available here. The lowest level of this geography changes often and can obsolesce before the next census survey (Decennial or American Community Survey programs). The second to lowest census level, block groups, have the benefit of both granularity and stability however. The 2020 Decennial survey details US demographics into 217,740 block groups with between a few hundred and a few thousand people. Dataset Structure The dataset's columns include: Column Definition BLOCKGROUP_GEOID 12 digit primary key. Census GEOID of the block group row. This code concatenates: 2 digit state 3 digit county within state 6 digit Census Tract identifier 1 digit Census Block Group identifier within tract STATE State abbreviation, redundent with 2 digit state FIPS code above REP Votes for Republican party candidate for president DEM Votes for Democratic party candidate for president LIB Votes for Libertarian party candidate for president OTH Votes for presidential candidates other than Republican, Democratic or Libertarian AREA square kilometers of area associated with this block group GAP total area of the block group, net of area attributed to voting precincts PRECINCTS Number of voting precincts that intersect this block group ASSUMPTIONS, NOTES AND CONCERNS: Votes are attributed based upon the proportion of the precinct's area that intersects the corresponding block group. Alternative methods are left to the analyst's initiative. 50 states and the District of Columbia are in scope as those U.S. possessions voting in the general election for the U.S. Presidency. Three states did not report their results at the precinct level: South Dakota, Kentucky and West Virginia. A dummy block group is added for each of these states to maintain national totals. These states represent 2.1% of all votes cast. Counties are commonly coded using FIPS codes. However, each election result file may have the county field named differently. Also, three states do not share county definitions - Delaware, Massachusetts, Alaska and the District of Columbia. Block groups may be used to capture geographies that do not have population like bodies of water. As a result, block groups without intersection voting precincts are not uncommon. In the U.S., elections are administered at a state level with the Federal Elections Commission compiling state totals against the Electoral College weights. The states have liberty, though, to define and change their own voting precincts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_precinct. The Census Bureau... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/sha256%3A05707c1dc04a814129f751937a6ea56b08413546b18b351a85bc96da16a7f8b5 for complete metadata about this dataset.

  10. D

    2022 Tract-level Indicators of Potential Disadvantage

    • catalog.dvrpc.org
    • dvrpc-dvrpcgis.opendata.arcgis.com
    • +1more
    api, geojson, html +1
    Updated Aug 28, 2025
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    DVRPC (2025). 2022 Tract-level Indicators of Potential Disadvantage [Dataset]. https://catalog.dvrpc.org/dataset/2022-tract-level-indicators-of-potential-disadvantage
    Explore at:
    geojson, xml, api, htmlAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Aug 28, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commissionhttps://www.dvrpc.org/
    Authors
    DVRPC
    Description

    Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Executive Order on Environmental Justice (#12898) do not provide specific guidance to evaluate EJ issues within a region's transportation planning process. Therefore, MPOs must devise their own methods for ensuring that EJ issues are investigated and evaluated in transportation decision-making. In 2001, DVRPC developed an EJ technical assessment to identify direct and disparate impacts of its plans, programs, and planning process on defined population groups in the Delaware Valley region. This assessment, called the Indicators of Potential Disadvantage Methodology, is utilized in a variety of DVRPC plans and programs. DVRPC currently assesses the following population groups, defined by the U.S. Census Bureau:

    Youth

    Older Adults

    Female

    Racial Minority

    Ethnic Minority

    Foreign-Born

    Disabled

    Limited English Proficiency

    Low-Income Census tables used to gather data from the 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Using U.S. Census American Community Survey data, the population groups listed above are identified and located at the census tract level. Data is gathered at the regional level, combining populations from each of the nine counties, for either individuals or households, depending on the indicator. From there, the total number of persons in each demographic group is divided by the appropriate universe (either population or households) for the nine-county region, providing a regional average for that population group. Any census tract that meets or exceeds the regional average level, or threshold, is considered an EJ-sensitive tract for that group. Census tables used to gather data from the 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. For more information and for methodology, visit DVRPC's website:http://www.dvrpc.org/GetInvolved/TitleVI/ For technical documentation visit DVRPC's GitHub IPD repo: https://github.com/dvrpc/ipd Source of tract boundaries: 2020 US Census Bureau, TIGER/Line Shapefiles Note: Tracts with null values should be symbolized as "Insufficient or No Data". Data Dictionary for Attributes: (Source = DVRPC indicates a calculated field)

    FieldAliasDescriptionSource
    yearIPD analysis yearDVRPC
    geoid2011-digit tract GEOIDCensus tract identifierACS 5-year
    statefp2-digit state GEOIDFIPS Code for StateACS 5-year
    countyfp3-digit county GEOIDFIPS Code for CountyACS 5-year
    tractceTract numberTract NumberACS 5-year
    nameTract numberCensus tract identifier with decimal placesACS 5-year
    namelsadTract nameCensus tract name with decimal placesACS 5-year
    d_classDisabled percentile classClassification of tract's disabled percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculated
    d_estDisabled count estimateEstimated count of disabled populationACS 5-year
    d_est_moeDisabled count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of disabled populationACS 5-year
    d_pctDisabled percent estimateEstimated percentage of disabled populationACS 5-year
    d_pct_moeDisabled percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of disabled populationACS 5-year
    d_pctileDisabled percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage disabledcalculated
    d_scoreDisabled percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's disabled classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculated
    em_classEthnic minority percentile classClassification of tract's Hispanic/Latino percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculated
    em_estEthnic minority count estimateEstimated count of Hispanic/Latino populationACS 5-year
    em_est_moeEthnic minority count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of Hispanic/Latino populationACS 5-year
    em_pctEthnic minority percent estimateEstimated percentage of Hispanic/Latino populationcalculated
    em_pct_moeEthnic minority percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of Hispanic/Latino populationcalculated
    em_pctileEthnic minority percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage Hispanic/Latinocalculated
    em_scoreEthnic minority percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's Hispanic/Latino classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculated
    f_classFemale percentile classClassification of tract's female percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculated
    f_estFemale count estimateEstimated count of female populationACS 5-year
    f_est_moeFemale count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of female populationACS 5-year
    f_pctFemale percent estimateEstimated percentage of female populationACS 5-year
    f_pct_moeFemale percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of female populationACS 5-year
    f_pctileFemale percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage femalecalculated
    f_scoreFemale percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's female classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculated
    fb_classForeign-born percentile classClassification of tract's foreign born percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculated
    fb_estForeign-born count estimateEstimated count of foreign born populationACS 5-year
    fb_est_moeForeign-born count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of foreign born populationACS 5-year
    fb_pctForeign-born percent estimateEstimated percentage of foreign born populationcalculated
    fb_pct_moeForeign-born percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of foreign born populationcalculated
    fb_pctileForeign-born percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage foreign borncalculated
    fb_scoreForeign-born percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's foreign born classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculated
    le_classLimited English proficiency percentile classClassification of tract's limited english proficiency percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculated
    le_estLimited English proficiency count estimateEstimated count of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-year
    le_est_moeLimited English proficiency count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-year
    le_pctLimited English proficiency percent estimateEstimated percentage of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-year
    le_pct_moeLimited English proficiency percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-year
    le_pctileLimited English proficiency percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage limited english proficiencycalculated
    le_scoreLimited English proficiency percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's limited english proficiency classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculated
    li_classLow-income percentile classClassification of tract's low income percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculated
    li_estLow-income count estimateEstimated count of low income (below 200% of poverty level) populationACS 5-year
    li_est_moeLow-income count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of low income populationACS 5-year
    li_pctLow-income percent estimateEstimated percentage of low income (below 200% of poverty level) populationcalculated
    li_pct_moeLow-income percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of low income populationcalculated
    li_pctileLow-income percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage low incomecalculated
    li_scoreLow-income percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's low income classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculated
    oa_classOlder adult percentile classClassification of tract's older adult percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculated
    oa_estOlder adult count estimateEstimated count of older adult population (65 years or older)ACS 5-year
    oa_est_moeOlder adult count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of older adult populationACS 5-year
    oa_pctOlder adult percent estimateEstimated percentage of older adult population (65 years or older)ACS 5-year
    oa_pct_moeOlder adult percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of older adult populationACS 5-year
    oa_pctileOlder adult percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage older adultcalculated
    oa_scoreOlder adult percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's older adult classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculated
    rm_classRacial minority percentile classClassification of tract's non-white percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculated
    rm_estRacial minority count estimateEstimated count of non-white populationACS 5-year
    rm_est_moeRacial minority count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of non-white populationACS 5-year
    rm_pctRacial minority percent estimateEstimated percentage of non-white populationcalculated
    rm_pct_moeRacial minority percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of non-white populationcalculated
    rm_pctileRacial minority percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage non-whitecalculated
    rm_scoreRacial minority percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's non-white classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculated
    tot_ppTotal population estimateEstimated total population of tract (universe [or
  11. Presence of Children (5), Number of Children at Home (8) and Census Family...

    • open.canada.ca
    xml
    Updated Mar 9, 2022
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statistics Canada (2022). Presence of Children (5), Number of Children at Home (8) and Census Family Structure (7) for the Census Families in Private Households of Census Metropolitan Areas, Tracted Census Agglomerations and Census Tracts, 2011 Census [Dataset]. https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/bc772bbb-b2b4-4057-86f8-fa2027de3f83
    Explore at:
    xmlAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Mar 9, 2022
    Dataset provided by
    Statistics Canadahttps://statcan.gc.ca/en
    License

    Open Government Licence - Canada 2.0https://open.canada.ca/en/open-government-licence-canada
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    This table is part of a series of tables that present a portrait of Canada based on the various census topics. The tables range in complexity and levels of geography. Content varies from a simple overview of the country to complex cross-tabulations; the tables may also cover several censuses.

  12. a

    Equity Focus Areas

    • psrc-psregcncl.hub.arcgis.com
    Updated Jul 1, 2025
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Puget Sound Regional Council (2025). Equity Focus Areas [Dataset]. https://psrc-psregcncl.hub.arcgis.com/items/89fb6e03dbd149b8a3e468d85e74e153
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 1, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Puget Sound Regional Council
    Area covered
    Description

    The Equity Focus Area dataset identifies the census tracts that have concentrations of equity populations above the regional average in King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish counties. The 2019-2023 U.S. Census Bureau's 5-year American Community Survey data was analyzed for this dataset. Equity focus populations include people of color, people with low incomes (below 200% of federal poverty level), youth (5-17), older adults (65+), people with disabilities, and people with limited English proficiency (who don't speak English very well). This dataset was used for the 2026-2054 Regional Transportation Plan analysis. This dataset represents the most recent data, which employs a revised methodology - different from the methodology used for the previous 'Equity Focus Areas 2019' dataset. For more detail about the methodology used to generate this dataset, please view the full metadata.

  13. 🍕US Food Access

    • kaggle.com
    zip
    Updated Aug 14, 2023
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    mexwell (2023). 🍕US Food Access [Dataset]. https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/mexwell/us-food-access
    Explore at:
    zip(189711 bytes)Available download formats
    Dataset updated
    Aug 14, 2023
    Authors
    mexwell
    License

    http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.htmlhttp://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.html

    Description

    From the United States Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service, the dataset contains information about US county’s ability to access supermarkets, supercenters, grocery stores, or other sources of healthy and affordable food. Most measures of how individuals and neighborhoods are able to access food are based on the following indicators: - Accessibility to sources of healthy food, as measured by distance to a store or by the number of stores in an area. - Individual-level resources that may affect accessibility, such as family income or vehicle availability. - Neighborhood-level indicators of resources, such as the average income of the neighborhood and the availability of public transportation.

    Data Dictionary

    KeyList of...CommentExample Value
    CountyStringCounty name"Autauga County"
    PopulationIntegerPopulation count from 2010 census54571
    StateStringState name"Alabama"
    Housing Data.Residing in Group QuartersFloatCount of tract population residing in group quarters455.0
    Housing Data.Total Housing UnitsIntegerOccupied housing unit count from 2010 census20221
    Vehicle Access.1 MileFloatHousing units without vehicle count beyond 1 mile from supermarket834.0
    Vehicle Access.1/2 MileFloatHousing units without vehicle count beyond 1/2 mile from supermarket1045.0
    Vehicle Access.10 MilesFloatHousing units without vehicle count beyond 10 miles from supermarket222.0
    Vehicle Access.20 MilesFloatHousing units without vehicle count beyond 20 miles from supermarket0.0
    Low Access Numbers.Children.1 MileFloatKids population count beyond 1 mile from supermarket9973.0
    Low Access Numbers.Children.1/2 MileFloatKids population count beyond 1/2 mile from supermarket13281.0
    Low Access Numbers.Children.10 MilesFloatKids population count beyond 10 miles from supermarket1199.0
    Low Access Numbers.Children.20 MilesFloatKids population count beyond 20 miles from supermarket0.0
    Low Access Numbers.Low Income People.1 MileFloatLow income population count beyond 1 mile from supermarket12067.0
    Low Access Numbers.Low Income People.1/2 MileFloatLow income population count beyond 1/2 mile from supermarket15518.0
    Low Access Numbers.Low Income People.10 MilesFloatLow income population count beyond 10 miles from supermarket2307.0
    Low Access Numbers.Low Income People.20 MilesFloatLow income population count beyond 20 miles from supermarket0.0
    Low Access Numbers.People.1 MileFloatPopulation count beyond 1 mile from supermarket37424.0
    Low Access Numbers.People.1/2 MileFloatPopulation count beyond 1/2 mile from supermarket49497.0
    Low Access Numbers.People.10 MilesFloatPopulation count beyond 10 miles from supermarket5119.0
    Low Access Numbers.People.20 MilesFloatPopulation count beyond 20 miles from supermarket0.0
    Low Access Numbers.Seniors.1 MileFloatSeniors population count beyond 1 mile from supermarket4393.0
    Low Access Numbers.Seniors.1/2 MileFloatSeniors population count beyond 1/2 mile from supermarket5935.0
    Low ...

  14. l

    Homeless Count by Council District - 2017

    • geohub.lacity.org
    • visionzero.geohub.lacity.org
    • +2more
    Updated Jul 28, 2017
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    nathan@lahsa (2017). Homeless Count by Council District - 2017 [Dataset]. https://geohub.lacity.org/datasets/homeless-count-by-council-district-2017
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jul 28, 2017
    Dataset authored and provided by
    nathan@lahsa
    Area covered
    Description

    Data Prepared by Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority

    July 26 2017

    Components of the Homeless Count

    Street Count (all census tracts): Captures a point in time estimate of the unsheltered population.

    Shelter Count (from Homeless Management Integration System): Captures the homeless population in emergency shelters, transitional housing, safe havens and vouchered motels/hotels.

    Youth Count (sample census tracts): Collaborative process with youth stakeholders to better understand and identify homeless youth.

    Demographic Survey (sample census tracts): Captures the demographic characteristics of the unsheltered homeless population.

    Notes

    Street Count Data include persons found outside, including persons found living in cars, vans, campers/RVs, tents, and makeshift shelters. The conversion factors used to estimate the number of persons found living outside are the following: For families—Makeshift Shelter = 3.69, Car = 2.96, Van = 3.46, Camper/RV = 3.52, Tent = 3.78; For Individuals—Makeshift Shelter = 1.92, Car = 1.52, Van = 1.77, Camper/RV = 2.05, Tent = 1.69.

    Please visit https://www.lahsa.org/homeless-count/home to view and download data.

    Last updated 7/26/2017

  15. Poverty Rate (<200% FPL) and Child (under 18) Poverty Rate by California...

    • data.ca.gov
    • data.chhs.ca.gov
    • +4more
    csv, pdf, xlsx, zip
    Updated Nov 7, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    California Department of Public Health (2025). Poverty Rate (<200% FPL) and Child (under 18) Poverty Rate by California Regions [Dataset]. https://data.ca.gov/dataset/poverty-rate-200-fpl-and-child-under-18-poverty-rate-by-california-regions
    Explore at:
    pdf, xlsx, csv, zipAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Nov 7, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    California Department of Public Healthhttps://www.cdph.ca.gov/
    License

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

    Area covered
    California
    Description

    This table contains data on the percentage of the total population living below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), and the percentage of children living below 200% FPL for California, its regions, counties, cities, towns, public use microdata areas, and census tracts. Data for time periods 2011-2015 (overall poverty) and 2012-2016 (child poverty) and with race/ethnicity stratification is included in the table. The poverty rate table is part of a series of indicators in the Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project of the Office of Health Equity. Poverty is an important social determinant of health (see http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/overview.aspx?topicid=39) that can impact people’s access to basic necessities (housing, food, education, jobs, and transportation), and is associated with higher incidence and prevalence of illness, and with reduced access to quality health care. More information on the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the About/Attachments section.

  16. l

    Health Professional Shortage Area: Mental Health

    • data.lacounty.gov
    • usc-geohealth-hub-uscssi.hub.arcgis.com
    • +2more
    Updated Feb 27, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    County of Los Angeles (2024). Health Professional Shortage Area: Mental Health [Dataset]. https://data.lacounty.gov/maps/lacounty::health-professional-shortage-area-mental-health/about
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Feb 27, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    County of Los Angeles
    Area covered
    Description

    This indicator provides information about health professional shortage areas (HPSAs) for mental health services as determined by the federal Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA). Each designated area includes multiple census tracts.HPSAs can be geographic areas, populations, or health care facilities that have been designated as having a shortage of health professionals. Geographic HPSAs have a shortage of providers for an entire population in a defined geographic area. Population HPSAs have a shortage of providers for a subpopulation in a defined geographic area, such as low-income populations, people experiencing homelessness, and migrant farmworker populations. In Los Angeles County, facility HPSAs include:•Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs); •FQHC Look-A-Likes (LALs); •Indian Health Service, Tribal Health, and Urban Indian Health Organizations; •correctional facilities; • and some other facilities. For these indicators, we include HPSAs in Los Angeles County with statuses listed as “Designated” or “Proposed for Withdrawal” (but not withdrawn yet). Due to the nature of the designation process, a census tract may be designated as any combination of geographic and population HPSAs and three categories of care (i.e., primary, dental, and mental health care). Facility HPSAs may also cover multiple types of care.State Primary Care Offices submit applications to HRSA to designate certain areas within counties as HPSAs for primary care, dental, and mental health services. HRSA’s National Health Service Corps calculates HPSA scores to determine priorities for assignment of clinicians. The scores range from 0 to 25 for mental health, where higher scores indicate greater priority. All HPSA categories shared three scoring criteria: (1) population-to-provider ratio, (2) percent of population below 100% of the Federal Poverty Level, and (3) travel time to the nearest source of care outside the HPSA designation area. Each category also has additional criteria that go into the scores. Specifically, mental health HPSA scoring includes elderly ratio (percent of people over age 65), youth ratio (percent of people under age 18), alcohol abuse prevalence, and substance abuse prevalence. Note: if an area is not designated as an HPSA, it does not mean it is not underserved, only that an application has not been filed for the area and that an official designation has not been given.HPSA designations help distribute participating health care providers and resources to high-need communities.For more information about the Community Health Profiles Data Initiative, please see the initiative homepage.

  17. ACS Youth School and Work Activity Variables - Centroids

    • mapdirect-fdep.opendata.arcgis.com
    • center-for-community-investment-lincolninstitute.hub.arcgis.com
    • +2more
    Updated Oct 22, 2018
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Esri (2018). ACS Youth School and Work Activity Variables - Centroids [Dataset]. https://mapdirect-fdep.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/esri::acs-youth-school-and-work-activity-variables-centroids
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Oct 22, 2018
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Esrihttp://esri.com/
    Area covered
    Description

    This layer shows youth (age 16-19) school enrollment and employment status. This is shown by tract, county, and state centroids. This service is updated annually to contain the most currently released American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year data, and contains estimates and margins of error. There are also additional calculated attributes related to this topic, which can be mapped or used within analysis. Estimates here for 'disconnected youth' differ from estimates of 'idle youth' on Census Bureau's website because idle youth includes those unemployed (actively looking for work). This layer is symbolized by the count of total youth and the percentage of youth who were disconnected. To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right. Current Vintage: 2019-2023ACS Table(s): B14005Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Date of API call: December 12, 2024National Figures: data.census.govThe United States Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS):About the SurveyGeography & ACSTechnical DocumentationNews & UpdatesThis ready-to-use layer can be used within ArcGIS Pro, ArcGIS Online, its configurable apps, dashboards, Story Maps, custom apps, and mobile apps. Data can also be exported for offline workflows. For more information about ACS layers, visit the FAQ. Please cite the Census and ACS when using this data.Data Note from the Census:Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables.Data Processing Notes:This layer is updated automatically when the most current vintage of ACS data is released each year, usually in December. The layer always contains the latest available ACS 5-year estimates. It is updated annually within days of the Census Bureau's release schedule. Click here to learn more about ACS data releases.Boundaries come from the US Census TIGER geodatabases, specifically, the National Sub-State Geography Database (named tlgdb_(year)_a_us_substategeo.gdb). Boundaries are updated at the same time as the data updates (annually), and the boundary vintage appropriately matches the data vintage as specified by the Census. These are Census boundaries with water and/or coastlines erased for cartographic and mapping purposes. For census tracts, the water cutouts are derived from a subset of the 2020 Areal Hydrography boundaries offered by TIGER. Water bodies and rivers which are 50 million square meters or larger (mid to large sized water bodies) are erased from the tract level boundaries, as well as additional important features. For state and county boundaries, the water and coastlines are derived from the coastlines of the 2023 500k TIGER Cartographic Boundary Shapefiles. These are erased to more accurately portray the coastlines and Great Lakes. The original AWATER and ALAND fields are still available as attributes within the data table (units are square meters). The States layer contains 52 records - all US states, Washington D.C., and Puerto RicoCensus tracts with no population that occur in areas of water, such as oceans, are removed from this data service (Census Tracts beginning with 99).Percentages and derived counts, and associated margins of error, are calculated values (that can be identified by the "_calc_" stub in the field name), and abide by the specifications defined by the American Community Survey.Field alias names were created based on the Table Shells file available from the American Community Survey Summary File Documentation page.Negative values (e.g., -4444...) have been set to null, with the exception of -5555... which has been set to zero. These negative values exist in the raw API data to indicate the following situations:The margin of error column indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute a standard error and thus the margin of error. A statistical test is not appropriate.Either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute an estimate, or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated because one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution.The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution, or in the upper interval of an open-ended distribution. A statistical test is not appropriate.The estimate is controlled. A statistical test for sampling variability is not appropriate.The data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small.

  18. a

    2023 Tract-level Indicators of Potential Disadvantage

    • njogis-newjersey.opendata.arcgis.com
    • catalog.dvrpc.org
    Updated May 5, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    DVRPC-GIS (2025). 2023 Tract-level Indicators of Potential Disadvantage [Dataset]. https://njogis-newjersey.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/dvrpcgis::2023-tract-level-indicators-of-potential-disadvantage
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    May 5, 2025
    Dataset authored and provided by
    DVRPC-GIS
    Area covered
    Description

    2023 Tract-level Indicators of Potential Disadvantage for the DVRPC RegionTitle VI of the Civil Rights Act states that "no person in the United States, shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.”Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are directed to create a method for ensuring that Title VI compliance issues are investigated and evaluated in transportation decision-making. There is additional guidance from the FHWA’s Title VI and Additional Nondiscrimination requirements (2017), and FTA’s Title VI requirements and guidelines (2012). The Indicators of Potential Disadvantage (IPD) analysis is used throughout DVRPC to demonstrate compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.This assessment, called the Indicators of Potential Disadvantage Methodology, is utilized in a variety of DVRPC plans and programs. DVRPC currently assesses the following population groups, defined by the U.S. Census Bureau:YouthOlder AdultsFemaleRacial MinorityEthnic MinorityForeign-BornDisabledLimited English ProficiencyLow-IncomeCensus tables used to gather data from the 2019-2023 American Community Survey 5-Year EstimatesUsing U.S. Census American Community Survey data, the population groups listed above are identified and located at the census tract level. Data is gathered at the regional level, combining populations from each of the nine counties, for either individuals or households, depending on the indicator. From there, the total number of persons in each demographic group is divided by the appropriate universe (either population or households) for the nine-county region, providing a regional average for that population group. Any census tract that meets or exceeds the regional average level, or threshold, is considered an EJ-sensitive tract for that group.Census tables used to gather data from the 2019-2023 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.For more information and for methodology, visit DVRPC's website:http://www.dvrpc.org/GetInvolved/TitleVI/For technical documentation visit DVRPC's GitHub IPD repo: https://github.com/dvrpc/ipdSource of tract boundaries: 2020 US Census Bureau, TIGER/Line ShapefilesNote: Tracts with null values should be symbolized as "Insufficient or No Data".Data Dictionary for Attributes:(Source = DVRPC indicates a calculated field)FieldAliasDescriptionSourceyearIPD analysis yearDVRPCgeoid2011-digit tract GEOIDCensus tract identifierACS 5-yearstatefp2-digit state GEOIDFIPS Code for StateACS 5-yearcountyfp3-digit county GEOIDFIPS Code for CountyACS 5-yeartractceTract numberTract NumberACS 5-yearnameTract numberCensus tract identifier with decimal placesACS 5-yearnamelsadTract nameCensus tract name with decimal placesACS 5-yeard_classDisabled percentile classClassification of tract's disabled percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedd_estDisabled count estimateEstimated count of disabled populationACS 5-yeard_est_moeDisabled count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of disabled populationACS 5-yeard_pctDisabled percent estimateEstimated percentage of disabled populationACS 5-yeard_pct_moeDisabled percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of disabled populationACS 5-yeard_pctileDisabled percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage disabledcalculatedd_scoreDisabled percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's disabled classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedem_classEthnic minority percentile classClassification of tract's Hispanic/Latino percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedem_estEthnic minority count estimateEstimated count of Hispanic/Latino populationACS 5-yearem_est_moeEthnic minority count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of Hispanic/Latino populationACS 5-yearem_pctEthnic minority percent estimateEstimated percentage of Hispanic/Latino populationcalculatedem_pct_moeEthnic minority percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of Hispanic/Latino populationcalculatedem_pctileEthnic minority percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage Hispanic/Latinocalculatedem_scoreEthnic minority percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's Hispanic/Latino classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedf_classFemale percentile classClassification of tract's female percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedf_estFemale count estimateEstimated count of female populationACS 5-yearf_est_moeFemale count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of female populationACS 5-yearf_pctFemale percent estimateEstimated percentage of female populationACS 5-yearf_pct_moeFemale percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of female populationACS 5-yearf_pctileFemale percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage femalecalculatedf_scoreFemale percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's female classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedfb_classForeign-born percentile classClassification of tract's foreign born percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedfb_estForeign-born count estimateEstimated count of foreign born populationACS 5-yearfb_est_moeForeign-born count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of foreign born populationACS 5-yearfb_pctForeign-born percent estimateEstimated percentage of foreign born populationcalculatedfb_pct_moeForeign-born percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of foreign born populationcalculatedfb_pctileForeign-born percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage foreign borncalculatedfb_scoreForeign-born percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's foreign born classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedle_classLimited English proficiency percentile classClassification of tract's limited english proficiency percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedle_estLimited English proficiency count estimateEstimated count of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-yearle_est_moeLimited English proficiency count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-yearle_pctLimited English proficiency percent estimateEstimated percentage of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-yearle_pct_moeLimited English proficiency percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-yearle_pctileLimited English proficiency percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage limited english proficiencycalculatedle_scoreLimited English proficiency percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's limited english proficiency classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedli_classLow-income percentile classClassification of tract's low income percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedli_estLow-income count estimateEstimated count of low income (below 200% of poverty level) populationACS 5-yearli_est_moeLow-income count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of low income populationACS 5-yearli_pctLow-income percent estimateEstimated percentage of low income (below 200% of poverty level) populationcalculatedli_pct_moeLow-income percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of low income populationcalculatedli_pctileLow-income percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage low incomecalculatedli_scoreLow-income percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's low income classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedoa_classOlder adult percentile classClassification of tract's older adult percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedoa_estOlder adult count estimateEstimated count of older adult population (65 years or older)ACS 5-yearoa_est_moeOlder adult count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of older adult populationACS 5-yearoa_pctOlder adult percent estimateEstimated percentage of older adult population (65 years or older)ACS 5-yearoa_pct_moeOlder adult percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of older adult populationACS 5-yearoa_pctileOlder adult percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage older adultcalculatedoa_scoreOlder adult percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's older adult classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedrm_classRacial minority percentile classClassification of tract's non-white percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedrm_estRacial minority count estimateEstimated count of non-white populationACS 5-yearrm_est_moeRacial minority count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of non-white populationACS 5-yearrm_pctRacial minority percent estimateEstimated percentage of non-white populationcalculatedrm_pct_moeRacial minority percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of non-white populationcalculatedrm_pctileRacial minority percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage non-whitecalculatedrm_scoreRacial minority percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's non-white classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedtot_ppTotal population estimateEstimated total population of tract (universe [or denominator] for youth, older adult, female, racial minoriry, ethnic minority, & foreign born)ACS 5-yeartot_pp_moeTotal population margin of errorMargin of error for estimated total population of tractACS 5-yeary_classYouth percentile classClassification of tract's youth percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above

  19. ACS2020 Social OpportunityYouth ZCTA

    • arcgis.com
    • arc-gis-hub-home-arcgishub.hub.arcgis.com
    • +1more
    Updated Apr 23, 2022
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Georgia Association of Regional Commissions (2022). ACS2020 Social OpportunityYouth ZCTA [Dataset]. https://www.arcgis.com/sharing/oauth2/social/authorize?socialLoginProviderName=facebook&oauth_state=axWFR-o9n6oOOF8xDHnII8w..8qJqEoORTs7MIsGOaRB8iKibZTxEm83uXrsmuURtKffjYPB7aG5OMLbBwu2vmtGd5LG6RrZwx7L65VpHNSv_-TK_LLQ0V5i9_JsXC1Vt0rfHpWOOYA6-6FSszvW3tvDAK8JHfOUMmPos6rQeFW2vJPzWFnfo2RSHS5CxtWRMPTSxi2horGxqntskuU5vFmIcgKj9uH3etwJNJ2cqYfh5PWIbdAU9ri5aFxctiNy-T_aRgy2ogogOZPpb715-xyoU2EDUw0-qbSjhvKgbky3hweN0GF7bKXDPKVlMa0IJVPNd3uhvDdJ2UEISnrcp_xNTT52y5EpjXxI8LCMCLrPUj1qXyWEBgP3NtzxUv9MRycxhaPzvsZmQT5s_u9oBqVyu9PEWU8Q.
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Apr 23, 2022
    Dataset provided by
    The Georgia Association of Regional Commissions
    Authors
    Georgia Association of Regional Commissions
    License

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

    Area covered
    Description

    This dataset was developed by the Research & Analytics Group at the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau across all standard and custom geographies at statewide summary level where applicable.

    For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the ACS 2016-2020 Data Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.

    Prefixes:

    None

    Count

    p

    Percent

    r

    Rate

    m

    Median

    a

    Mean (average)

    t

    Aggregate (total)

    ch

    Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)

    pch

    Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)

    chp

    Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)

    s

    Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% CI, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed

    Suffixes:

    _e20

    Estimate from 2016-20 ACS

    _m20

    Margin of Error from 2016-20 ACS

    _e10

    2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2020 geography

    _m10

    Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2020 geography

    _e10_20

    Change, 2010-20 (holding constant at 2020 geography)

    Geographies

    AAA = Area Agency on Aging (12 geographic units formed from counties providing statewide coverage)

    ARWDB7 = Atlanta Regional Workforce Development Board (7 counties merged to a single geographic unit)

    Census Tracts (statewide)

    CFGA23 = Community Foundation for Greater Atlanta (23 counties merged to a single geographic unit)

    City (statewide)

    City of Atlanta Council Districts (City of Atlanta)

    City of Atlanta Neighborhood Planning Unit (City of Atlanta)

    City of Atlanta Neighborhood Planning Unit STV (subarea of City of Atlanta)

    City of Atlanta Neighborhood Statistical Areas (City of Atlanta)

    County (statewide)

    Georgia House (statewide)

    Georgia Senate (statewide)

    MetroWater15 = Atlanta Metropolitan Water District (15 counties merged to a single geographic unit)

    Regional Commissions (statewide)

    State of Georgia (statewide)

    Superdistrict (ARC region)

    US Congress (statewide)

    UWGA13 = United Way of Greater Atlanta (13 counties merged to a single geographic unit)

    WFF = Westside Future Fund (subarea of City of Atlanta)

    ZIP Code Tabulation Areas (statewide)

    The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent.

    The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2016-2020). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available.

    For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.

    Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Atlanta Regional Commission Date: 2016-2020 Data License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC by 4.0)

    Link to the manifest: https://opendata.atlantaregional.com/documents/GARC::acs-2020-data-manifest/about

  20. Not seeing a result you expected?
    Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.

Share
FacebookFacebook
TwitterTwitter
Email
Click to copy link
Link copied
Close
Cite
Georgia Association of Regional Commissions (2021). Opportunity Youth (by US Congress) 2019 [Dataset]. https://arc-garc.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/opportunity-youth-by-us-congress-2019
Organization logo

Opportunity Youth (by US Congress) 2019

Explore at:
Dataset updated
Mar 3, 2021
Dataset provided by
The Georgia Association of Regional Commissions
Authors
Georgia Association of Regional Commissions
License

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

Area covered
Description

This dataset was developed by the Research & Analytics Group at the Atlanta Regional Commission using data from the U.S. Census Bureau.For a deep dive into the data model including every specific metric, see the Infrastructure Manifest. The manifest details ARC-defined naming conventions, field names/descriptions and topics, summary levels; source tables; notes and so forth for all metrics.Naming conventions:Prefixes: None Countp Percentr Ratem Mediana Mean (average)t Aggregate (total)ch Change in absolute terms (value in t2 - value in t1)pch Percent change ((value in t2 - value in t1) / value in t1)chp Change in percent (percent in t2 - percent in t1)s Significance flag for change: 1 = statistically significant with a 90% CI, 0 = not statistically significant, blank = cannot be computed Suffixes: _e19 Estimate from 2014-19 ACS_m19 Margin of Error from 2014-19 ACS_00_v19 Decennial 2000, re-estimated to 2019 geography_00_19 Change, 2000-19_e10_v19 2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2019 geography_m10_v19 Margin of Error from 2006-10 ACS, re-estimated to 2019 geography_e10_19 Change, 2010-19The user should note that American Community Survey data represent estimates derived from a surveyed sample of the population, which creates some level of uncertainty, as opposed to an exact measure of the entire population (the full census count is only conducted once every 10 years and does not cover as many detailed characteristics of the population). Therefore, any measure reported by ACS should not be taken as an exact number – this is why a corresponding margin of error (MOE) is also given for ACS measures. The size of the MOE relative to its corresponding estimate value provides an indication of confidence in the accuracy of each estimate. Each MOE is expressed in the same units as its corresponding measure; for example, if the estimate value is expressed as a number, then its MOE will also be a number; if the estimate value is expressed as a percent, then its MOE will also be a percent. The user should also note that for relatively small geographic areas, such as census tracts shown here, ACS only releases combined 5-year estimates, meaning these estimates represent rolling averages of survey results that were collected over a 5-year span (in this case 2015-2019). Therefore, these data do not represent any one specific point in time or even one specific year. For geographic areas with larger populations, 3-year and 1-year estimates are also available. For further explanation of ACS estimates and margin of error, visit Census ACS website.Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Atlanta Regional CommissionDate: 2015-2019Data License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC by 4.0)Link to the manifest: https://www.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/3d489c725bb24f52a987b302147c46ee/data

Search
Clear search
Close search
Google apps
Main menu