Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Managed care health insurers in the USA restrict their enrollees' choice of hospitals to within specific networks. This paper considers the implications of these restrictions. A three-step econometric model is used to predict consumer preferences over health plans conditional on the hospitals they offer. The results indicate that consumers place a positive and significant weight on their expected utility from the hospital network when choosing plans. A welfare analysis, assuming fixed prices, implies that restricting consumers' choice of hospitals leads to a loss to society of approximately $1 billion per year across the 43 US markets considered. This figure may be outweighed by the price reductions generated by the restriction.
This map displays data from the Selected Economic Indicators (DP03) dataset from the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau. Data is shown at the level of Census Tract, County, and Small Area (aggregation of Census Tracts developed by the New Mexico Department of Health). Measuring poverty is a topic of much current discussion. See the following links: A Different Way to Measure Poverty - http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/image/census.jpg"Few topics in American society have more myths and stereotypes surrounding them than poverty, misconceptions that distort both our politics and our domestic policy making."They include the notion that poverty affects a relatively small number of Americans, that the poor are impoverished for years at a time, that most of those in poverty live in inner cities, that too much welfare assistance is provided and that poverty is ultimately a result of not working hard enough. Although pervasive, each assumption is flat-out wrong." -Mark Rank, Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/02/poverty-in-america-is-mainstream/
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Occupation describes the kind of work a person does on the job. Occupation data were derived from answers to questions 45 and 46 in the 2015 American Community Survey (ACS). Question 45 asks: “What kind of work was this person doing?” Question 46 asks: “What were this person’s most important activities or duties?”
These questions were asked of all people 15 years old and over who had worked in the past 5 years. For employed people, the data refer to the person’s job during the previous week. For those who worked two or more jobs, the data refer to the job where the person worked the greatest number of hours. For unemployed people and people who are not currently employed but report having a job within the last five years, the data refer to their last job.
These questions describe the work activity and occupational experience of the American labor force. Data are used to formulate policy and programs for employment, career development, and training; to provide information on the occupational skills of the labor force in a given area to analyze career trends; and to measure compliance with antidiscrimination policies. Companies use these data to decide where to locate new plants, stores, or offices.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Analysis of ‘US Public Food Assistance’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/jpmiller/publicassistance on 13 February 2022.
--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---
This dataset focuses on public assistance programs in the United States that provide food, namely SNAP and WIC. If you are interested in a broader picture of food security across the world, please see Food Security Indicators for the World 2016-2020.
Initial coverage was for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children Program, or simply WIC. The program allocates Federal and State funds to help low-income women and children up to age five who are at nutritional risk. Funds are used to provide supplemental foods, baby formula, health care, and nutrition education.
Starting with version 5, the dataset also covers the US Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, more commonly known as SNAP. The program is the successor to the Food Stamps program previously in place. The program provides food assistance to low-income families in the form of a debit card. A 2016 study using POS data from SNAP-eligible vendors showed the three most purchased types of food to be meats, sweetened beverages, and vegetables.
Files may include participation data and spending for state programs, and poverty data for each state. Data for WIC covers fiscal years 2013-2016, which is actually October 2012 through September 2016. Data for SNAP covers 2015 to 2020.
My original purpose here is two-fold:
Explore various aspects of US Public Assistance. Show trends over recent years and better understand differences across state agencies. Although the federal government sponsors the program and provides funding, program are administered at the state level and can widely vary. Indian nations (native Americans) also administer their own programs.
Share with the Kaggle Community the joy - and pain - of working with government data. Data is often spread across numerous agency sites and comes in a variety of formats. Often the data is provided in Excel, with the files consisting of multiple tabs. Also, files are formatted as reports and contain aggregated data (sums, averages, etc.) along with base data.
As of March 2nd, I am expanding the purpose to support the M5 Forecasting Challenges here on Kaggle. Store sales are partly driven by participation in Public Assistance programs. Participants typically receive the items free of charge. The store then recovers the sale price from the state agencies administering the program.
The dataset can benefit greatly from additional content. Economics, additional demographics, administrative costs and more. I'd like to eventually explore the money trail from taxes and corporate subsidies, through the government agencies, and on to program participants. All community ideas are welcome!
--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---
https://www.usa.gov/government-workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
This dataset summarizes the number of dependent children (less than 18 years old) removed from households due to parental drug abuse. The data indicates if the dependent children were placed in kinship care or not. The total number of children in this data set are provided by the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS), which publishes 5 year estimates of the population. The most recent year of entries in this data set may be available before the corresponding ACS population estimates for that year are published. In that case, the data set uses values from the most recently published ACS estimates and notes the year from which those estimates are pulled. These values are updated once the Census Bureau releases the most recent estimates.” *Kinship care refers to the care of children by relatives or, in some jurisdictions, close family friends (often referred to as fictive kin). Relatives are the preferred resource for children who must be removed from their birth parents because it maintains the children's connections with their families. *The Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) definition of parental drug abuse is “Principal caretaker’s compulsive use of drugs that is not of a temporary nature.”
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
United States US: Survey Mean Consumption or Income per Capita: Bottom 40% of Population: Annualized Average Growth Rate data was reported at 1.310 % in 2016. United States US: Survey Mean Consumption or Income per Capita: Bottom 40% of Population: Annualized Average Growth Rate data is updated yearly, averaging 1.310 % from Dec 2016 (Median) to 2016, with 1 observations. United States US: Survey Mean Consumption or Income per Capita: Bottom 40% of Population: Annualized Average Growth Rate data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Poverty. The growth rate in the welfare aggregate of the bottom 40% is computed as the annualized average growth rate in per capita real consumption or income of the bottom 40% of the population in the income distribution in a country from household surveys over a roughly 5-year period. Mean per capita real consumption or income is measured at 2011 Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) using the PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet). For some countries means are not reported due to grouped and/or confidential data. The annualized growth rate is computed as (Mean in final year/Mean in initial year)^(1/(Final year - Initial year)) - 1. The reference year is the year in which the underlying household survey data was collected. In cases for which the data collection period bridged two calendar years, the first year in which data were collected is reported. The initial year refers to the nearest survey collected 5 years before the most recent survey available, only surveys collected between 3 and 7 years before the most recent survey are considered. The final year refers to the most recent survey available between 2011 and 2015. Growth rates for Iraq are based on survey means of 2005 PPP$. The coverage and quality of the 2011 PPP price data for Iraq and most other North African and Middle Eastern countries were hindered by the exceptional period of instability they faced at the time of the 2011 exercise of the International Comparison Program. See PovcalNet for detailed explanations.; ; World Bank, Global Database of Shared Prosperity (GDSP) circa 2010-2015 (http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/brief/global-database-of-shared-prosperity).; ; The comparability of welfare aggregates (consumption or income) for the chosen years T0 and T1 is assessed for every country. If comparability across the two surveys is a major concern for a country, the selection criteria are re-applied to select the next best survey year(s). Annualized growth rates are calculated between the survey years, using a compound growth formula. The survey years defining the period for which growth rates are calculated and the type of welfare aggregate used to calculate the growth rates are noted in the footnotes.
This map displays data from the Selected Economic Indicators (DP03) dataset from the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau. Data is shown at the level of Census Tract, County, and Small Area (aggregation of Census Tracts developed by the New Mexico Department of Health). Measuring poverty is a topic of much current discussion. See the following links: A Different Way to Measure Poverty - http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/image/census.jpg"Few topics in American society have more myths and stereotypes surrounding them than poverty, misconceptions that distort both our politics and our domestic policy making."They include the notion that poverty affects a relatively small number of Americans, that the poor are impoverished for years at a time, that most of those in poverty live in inner cities, that too much welfare assistance is provided and that poverty is ultimately a result of not working hard enough. Although pervasive, each assumption is flat-out wrong." -Mark Rank, Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/02/poverty-in-america-is-mainstream/
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
This dataset includes the ethnicity of applicants for Insurance Affordability Programs (IAPs) who identified their ethnicity as Hispanic with the ethnic origin as Guatemalan, Mexican/Mexican American/Chicano, Other, Puerto Rican, Salvadoran, Mixed, or Cuban, Hispanic with ethnic origin not reported, not Hispanic, or ethnicity not reported by reporting period. The ethnicity data is from the California Healthcare Eligibility, Enrollment and Retention System (CalHEERS) and includes data from applications submitted directly to CalHEERS, to Covered California, and to County Human Services Agencies through the Statewide Automated Welfare System (SAWS) eHIT interface. This dataset is part of public reporting requirements set forth by the California Welfare and Institutions Code 14102.5.
This map displays data from the Selected Economic Indicators (DP03) dataset from the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau. Data is shown at the level of Census Tract, County, and Small Area (aggregation of Census Tracts developed by the New Mexico Department of Health). Measuring poverty is a topic of much current discussion. See the following links: A Different Way to Measure Poverty - http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/image/census.jpg"Few topics in American society have more myths and stereotypes surrounding them than poverty, misconceptions that distort both our politics and our domestic policy making."They include the notion that poverty affects a relatively small number of Americans, that the poor are impoverished for years at a time, that most of those in poverty live in inner cities, that too much welfare assistance is provided and that poverty is ultimately a result of not working hard enough. Although pervasive, each assumption is flat-out wrong." -Mark Rank, Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/02/poverty-in-america-is-mainstream/
This map was updated in April of 2022. This is the archived version of this map. To see the new map, click here: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=501b02e45c0a47aa874ab4423d4c9f50#overviewThis map displays data from the Selected Economic Indicators (DP03) dataset from the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau. Data is shown at the level of Census Tract, County, and Small Area (aggregation of Census Tracts developed by the New Mexico Department of Health). Measuring poverty is a topic of much current discussion. See the following links: A Different Way to Measure Poverty - https://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/image/census.jpg"Few topics in American society have more myths and stereotypes surrounding them than poverty, misconceptions that distort both our politics and our domestic policy making."They include the notion that poverty affects a relatively small number of Americans, that the poor are impoverished for years at a time, that most of those in poverty live in inner cities, that too much welfare assistance is provided and that poverty is ultimately a result of not working hard enough. Although pervasive, each assumption is flat-out wrong." -Mark Rank, Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University: https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/02/poverty-in-america-is-mainstream/
Latin American pension reforms during the 1990s dramatically increased the number of Latin Americans with a direct stake in the returns to financial capital. This paper asks: How, if at all, has this expansion affected Latin American politics? I focus particularly on popular attitudes towards neoliberalism. I argue that government-induced expansions of capital ownership do not affect public preferences about neoliberalism directly, but indirectly by shaping the information that people use to judge whether neoliberalism is welfare enhancing. In this view, participation in a reformed Latin American pension system should lead to acceptance of neoliberalism when pensions returns are high, but have the opposite effect when pension returns are low. I find support for this theory in analyses of multiple datasets of Latin American survey data.
This map was updated in April of 2022. To see the archived version of this map, click here: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=2e4c4c4cafcc49db80837f32912e66a5#overviewThis map displays data from the Selected Economic Indicators (DP03) dataset from the 2020 American Community Survey 5-Yr Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau. Data is shown at the level of Census Tract and County levels. Small Areas are not on this map at this time (aggregation of Census Tracts developed by the New Mexico Department of Health). Measuring poverty is a topic of much current discussion. See the following links: A Different Way to Measure Poverty - https://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/image/census.jpg"Few topics in American society have more myths and stereotypes surrounding them than poverty, misconceptions that distort both our politics and our domestic policy making."They include the notion that poverty affects a relatively small number of Americans, that the poor are impoverished for years at a time, that most of those in poverty live in inner cities, that too much welfare assistance is provided and that poverty is ultimately a result of not working hard enough. Although pervasive, each assumption is flat-out wrong." -Mark Rank, Professor of Social Welfare at Washington University: https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/02/poverty-in-america-is-mainstream/
This dataset includes the race of applicants for Insurance Affordability Programs (IAPs) who reported their race as American Indian and/or Alaska Native, Asian Indian, Black or African American, Chinese, Cambodian, Filipino, Guamanian or Chamorro, Hmong, Japanese, Korean, Laotian, Mixed Race, Native Hawaiian, Other, Other Asian, Other Pacific Islander, Samoan, Vietnamese, or White by reporting period. The race data is from the California Healthcare Eligibility, Enrollment and Retention System (CalHEERS) and includes data from applications submitted directly to CalHEERS, to Covered California, and to County Human Services Agencies through the Statewide Automated Welfare System (SAWS) eHIT interface. Please note the reporting category Other Asian option on the CalHEERS application was removed in September 2017. This dataset is part of public reporting requirements set forth by the California Welfare and Institutions Code 14102.5.
https://www.usa.gov/government-workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
The numbers of single perpetrator relationships (unique count) are counted once for each relationship category. Perpetrators with two or more relationships are counted in the multiple relationship category. Numbers are for the most recent federal fiscal year for which data are available.
To view more National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) findings, click link to summary page below: https://healthdata.gov/stories/s/kaeg-w7jc
Not seeing a result you expected?
Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Managed care health insurers in the USA restrict their enrollees' choice of hospitals to within specific networks. This paper considers the implications of these restrictions. A three-step econometric model is used to predict consumer preferences over health plans conditional on the hospitals they offer. The results indicate that consumers place a positive and significant weight on their expected utility from the hospital network when choosing plans. A welfare analysis, assuming fixed prices, implies that restricting consumers' choice of hospitals leads to a loss to society of approximately $1 billion per year across the 43 US markets considered. This figure may be outweighed by the price reductions generated by the restriction.