About this dataset

Context

This list ranks the 14 counties in the Massachusetts by Hispanic Black or African American population, as estimated by the United States Census Bureau. It also highlights population changes in each counties over the past five years.

Content

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

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

Variables / Data Columns

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

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

About this dataset

Context

This list ranks the 14 counties in the Massachusetts by Hispanic Asian population, as estimated by the United States Census Bureau. It also highlights population changes in each counties over the past five years.

Content

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

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

Variables / Data Columns

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

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

Reporting of Aggregate Case and Death Count data was discontinued May 11, 2023, with the expiration of the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration. Although these data will continue to be publicly available, this dataset will no longer be updated.

This archived public use dataset has 11 data elements reflecting United States COVID-19 community levels for all available counties.

The COVID-19 community levels were developed using a combination of three metrics — new COVID-19 admissions per 100,000 population in the past 7 days, the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients, and total new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days. The COVID-19 community level was determined by the higher of the new admissions and inpatient beds metrics, based on the current level of new cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days. New COVID-19 admissions and the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied represent the current potential for strain on the health system. Data on new cases acts as an early warning indicator of potential increases in health system strain in the event of a COVID-19 surge.

Using these data, the COVID-19 community level was classified as low, medium, or high.

COVID-19 Community Levels were used to help communities and individuals make decisions based on their local context and their unique needs. Community vaccination coverage and other local information, like early alerts from surveillance, such as through wastewater or the number of emergency department visits for COVID-19, when available, can also inform decision making for health officials and individuals.

For the most accurate and up-to-date data for any county or state, visit the relevant health department website. COVID Data Tracker may display data that differ from state and local websites. This can be due to differences in how data were collected, how metrics were calculated, or the timing of web updates.

Archived Data Notes:

This dataset was renamed from "United States COVID-19 Community Levels by County as Originally Posted" to "United States COVID-19 Community Levels by County" on March 31, 2022.

March 31, 2022: Column name for county population was changed to “county_population”. No change was made to the data points previous released.

March 31, 2022: New column, “health_service_area_population”, was added to the dataset to denote the total population in the designated Health Service Area based on 2019 Census estimate.

March 31, 2022: FIPS codes for territories American Samoa, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and United States Virgin Islands were re-formatted to 5-digit numeric for records released on 3/3/2022 to be consistent with other records in the dataset.

March 31, 2022: Changes were made to the text fields in variables “county”, “state”, and “health_service_area” so the formats are consistent across releases.

March 31, 2022: The “%” sign was removed from the text field in column “covid_inpatient_bed_utilization”. No change was made to the data. As indicated in the column description, values in this column represent the percentage of staffed inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients (7-day average).

March 31, 2022: Data values for columns, “county_population”, “health_service_area_number”, and “health_service_area” were backfilled for records released on 2/24/2022. These columns were added since the week of 3/3/2022, thus the values were previously missing for records released the week prior.

April 7, 2022: Updates made to data released on 3/24/2022 for Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and United States Virgin Islands to correct a data mapping error.

April 21, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for counties in Nebraska for the week of April 21, 2022 have 3 counties identified in the high category and 37 in the medium category. CDC has been working with state officials to verify the data submitted, as other data systems are not providing alerts for substantial increases in disease transmission or severity in the state.

May 26, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for McCracken County, KY for the week of May 5, 2022 have been updated to correct a data processing error. McCracken County, KY should have appeared in the low community level category during the week of May 5, 2022. This correction is reflected in this update.

May 26, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for several Florida counties for the week of May 19th, 2022, have been corrected for a data processing error. Of note, Broward, Miami-Dade, Palm Beach Counties should have appeared in the high CCL category, and Osceola County should have appeared in the medium CCL category. These corrections are reflected in this update.

May 26, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Orange County, New York for the week of May 26, 2022 displayed an erroneous case rate of zero and a CCL category of low due to a data source error. This county should have appeared in the medium CCL category.

June 2, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Tolland County, CT for the week of May 26, 2022 have been updated to correct a data processing error. Tolland County, CT should have appeared in the medium community level category during the week of May 26, 2022. This correction is reflected in this update.

June 9, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Tolland County, CT for the week of May 26, 2022 have been updated to correct a misspelling. The medium community level category for Tolland County, CT on the week of May 26, 2022 was misspelled as “meduim” in the data set. This correction is reflected in this update.

June 9, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Mississippi counties for the week of June 9, 2022 should be interpreted with caution due to a reporting cadence change over the Memorial Day holiday that resulted in artificially inflated case rates in the state.

July 7, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Rock County, Minnesota for the week of July 7, 2022 displayed an artificially low case rate and CCL category due to a data source error. This county should have appeared in the high CCL category.

July 14, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Massachusetts counties for the week of July 14, 2022 should be interpreted with caution due to a reporting cadence change that resulted in lower than expected case rates and CCL categories in the state.

July 28, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for all Montana counties for the week of July 21, 2022 had case rates of 0 due to a reporting issue. The case rates have been corrected in this update.

July 28, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Alaska for all weeks prior to July 21, 2022 included non-resident cases. The case rates for the time series have been corrected in this update.

July 28, 2022: A laboratory in Nevada reported a backlog of historic COVID-19 cases. As a result, the 7-day case count and rate will be inflated in Clark County, NV for the week of July 28, 2022.

August 4, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data was updated on August 2, 2022 in error during performance testing. Data for the week of July 28, 2022 was changed during this update due to additional case and hospital data as a result of late reporting between July 28, 2022 and August 2, 2022. Since the purpose of this data set is to provide point-in-time views of COVID-19 Community Levels on Thursdays, any changes made to the data set during the August 2, 2022 update have been reverted in this update.

August 4, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data for the week of July 28, 2022 for 8 counties in Utah (Beaver County, Daggett County, Duchesne County, Garfield County, Iron County, Kane County, Uintah County, and Washington County) case data was missing due to data collection issues. CDC and its partners have resolved the issue and the correction is reflected in this update.

August 4, 2022: Due to a reporting cadence change, case rates for all Alabama counties will be lower than expected. As a result, the CCL levels published on August 4, 2022 should be interpreted with caution.

August 11, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data for the week of August 4, 2022 for South Carolina have been updated to correct a data collection error that resulted in incorrect case data. CDC and its partners have resolved the issue and the correction is reflected in this update.

August 18, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data for the week of August 11, 2022 for Connecticut have been updated to correct a data ingestion error that inflated the CT case rates. CDC, in collaboration with CT, has resolved the issue and the correction is reflected in this update.

August 25, 2022: A laboratory in Tennessee reported a backlog of historic COVID-19 cases. As a result, the 7-day case count and rate may be inflated in many counties and the CCLs published on August 25, 2022 should be interpreted with caution.

August 25, 2022: Due to a data source error, the 7-day case rate for St. Louis County, Missouri, is reported as zero in the COVID-19 Community Level data released on August 25, 2022. Therefore, the COVID-19 Community Level for this county should be interpreted with caution.

September 1, 2022: Due to a reporting issue, case rates for all Nebraska counties will include 6 days of data instead of 7 days in the COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released on September 1, 2022. Therefore, the CCLs for all Nebraska counties should be interpreted with caution.

September 8, 2022: Due to a data processing error, the case rate for Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania,

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Address Ranges Relationship File (ADDR.dbf) contains the attributes of each address range. Each address range applies to a single edge and has a unique address range identifier (ARID) value. The edge to which an address range applies can be determined by linking the address range to the All Lines Shapefile (EDGES.shp) using the permanent topological edge identifier (TLID) attribute. Multiple address ranges can apply to the same edge since an edge can have multiple address ranges. Note that the most inclusive address range associated with each side of a street edge already appears in the All Lines Shapefile (EDGES.shp). The TIGER/Line Files contain potential address ranges, not individual addresses. The term "address range" refers to the collection of all possible structure numbers from the first structure number to the last structure number and all numbers of a specified parity in between along an edge side relative to the direction in which the edge is coded. The address ranges in the TIGER/Line Files are potential ranges that include the full range of possible structure numbers even though the actual structures may not exist.

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Address Ranges Feature Shapefile (ADDRFEAT.dbf) contains the geospatial edge geometry and attributes of all unsuppressed address ranges for a county or county equivalent area. The term "address range" refers to the collection of all possible structure numbers from the first structure number to the last structure number and all numbers of a specified parity in between along an edge side relative to the direction in which the edge is coded. Single-address address ranges have been suppressed to maintain the confidentiality of the addresses they describe. Multiple coincident address range feature edge records are represented in the shapefile if more than one left or right address ranges are associated to the edge. The ADDRFEAT shapefile contains a record for each address range to street name combination. Address range associated to more than one street name are also represented by multiple coincident address range feature edge records. Note that the ADDRFEAT shapefile includes all unsuppressed address ranges compared to the All Lines Shapefile (EDGES.shp) which only includes the most inclusive address range associated with each side of a street edge. The TIGER/Line shapefile contain potential address ranges, not individual addresses. The address ranges in the TIGER/Line Files are potential ranges that include the full range of possible structure numbers even though the actual structures may not exist.

April 2022

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national filewith no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independentdata set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. Linear Water Features includes single-line drainage water features and artificial path features that run through double-line drainage features such as rivers and streams, and serve as a linear representation of these features. The artificial path features may correspond to those in the USGS National Hydrographic Dataset (NHD). However, in many cases the features do not match NHD equivalent feature and will not carry the NHD metadata codes. These features have a MAF/TIGER Feature Classification Code (MTFCC) beginning with an "H" to indicate the super class of Hydrographic Features.

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Address Range / Feature Name Relationship File (ADDRFN.dbf) contains a record for each address range / linear feature name relationship. The purpose of this relationship file is to identify all street names associated with each address range. An edge can have several feature names; an address range located on an edge can be associated with one or any combination of the available feature names (an address range can be linked to multiple feature names). The address range is identified by the address range identifier (ARID) attribute that can be used to link to the Address Ranges Relationship File (ADDR.dbf). The linear feature name is identified by the linear feature identifier (LINEARID) attribute that can be used to link to the Feature Names Relationship File (FEATNAMES.dbf).

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Address Ranges Feature Shapefile (ADDRFEAT.dbf) contains the geospatial edge geometry and attributes of all unsuppressed address ranges for a county or county equivalent area. The term "address range" refers to the collection of all possible structure numbers from the first structure number to the last structure number and all numbers of a specified parity in between along an edge side relative to the direction in which the edge is coded. Single-address address ranges have been suppressed to maintain the confidentiality of the addresses they describe. Multiple coincident address range feature edge records are represented in the shapefile if more than one left or right address ranges are associated to the edge. The ADDRFEAT shapefile contains a record for each address range to street name combination. Address range associated to more than one street name are also represented by multiple coincident address range feature edge records. Note that the ADDRFEAT shapefile includes all unsuppressed address ranges compared to the All Lines Shapefile (EDGES.shp) which only includes the most inclusive address range associated with each side of a street edge. The TIGER/Line shapefile contain potential address ranges, not individual addresses. The address ranges in the TIGER/Line Files are potential ranges that include the full range of possible structure numbers even though the actual structures may not exist.

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. Face refers to the areal (polygon) topological primitives that make up MTDB. A face is bounded by one or more edges; its boundary includes only the edges that separate it from other faces, not any interior edges contained within the area of the face. The Topological Faces Shapefile contains the attributes of each topological primitive face. Each face has a unique topological face identifier (TFID) value. Each face in the shapefile includes the key geographic area codes for all geographic areas for which the Census Bureau tabulates data for both the 2020 Census and the annual estimates and surveys. The geometries of each of these geographic areas can then be built by dissolving the face geometries on the appropriate key geographic area codes in the Topological Faces Shapefile.

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Feature Names Relationship File (FEATNAMES.dbf) contains a record for each feature name and any attributes associated with it. Each feature name can be linked to the corresponding edges that make up that feature in the All Lines Shapefile (EDGES.shp), where applicable to the corresponding address range or ranges in the Address Ranges Relationship File (ADDR.dbf), or to both files. Although this file includes feature names for all linear features, not just road features, the primary purpose of this relationship file is to identify all street names associated with each address range. An edge can have several feature names; an address range located on an edge can be associated with one or any combination of the available feature names (an address range can be linked to multiple feature names). The address range is identified by the address range identifier (ARID) attribute, which can be used to link to the Address Ranges Relationship File (ADDR.dbf). The linear feature is identified by the linear feature identifier (LINEARID) attribute, which can be used to relate the address range back to the name attributes of the feature in the Feature Names Relationship File or to the feature record in the Primary Roads, Primary and Secondary Roads, or All Roads Shapefiles. The edge to which a feature name applies can be determined by linking the feature name record to the All Lines Shapefile (EDGES.shp) using the permanent edge identifier (TLID) attribute. The address range identifier(s) (ARID) for a specific linear feature can be found by using the linear feature identifier (LINEARID) from the Feature Names Relationship File (FEATNAMES.dbf) through the Address Range / Feature Name Relationship File (ADDRFN.dbf).

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national filewith no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independentdata set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Address Range / Feature Name Relationship File (ADDRFN.dbf) contains a record for each address range / linear feature name relationship. The purpose of this relationship file is to identify all street names associated with each address range. An edge can have several feature names; an address range located on an edge can be associated with one or any combination of the available feature names (an address range can be linked to multiple feature names). The address range is identified by the address range identifier (ARID) attribute that can be used to link to the Address Ranges Relationship File (ADDR.dbf). The linear feature name is identified by the linear feature identifier (LINEARID) attribute that can be used to link to the Feature Names Relationship File (FEATNAMES.dbf).

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Feature Names Relationship File (FEATNAMES.dbf) contains a record for each feature name and any attributes associated with it. Each feature name can be linked to the corresponding edges that make up that feature in the All Lines Shapefile (EDGES.shp), where applicable to the corresponding address range or ranges in the Address Ranges Relationship File (ADDR.dbf), or to both files. Although this file includes feature names for all linear features, not just road features, the primary purpose of this relationship file is to identify all street names associated with each address range. An edge can have several feature names; an address range located on an edge can be associated with one or any combination of the available feature names (an address range can be linked to multiple feature names). The address range is identified by the address range identifier (ARID) attribute, which can be used to link to the Address Ranges Relationship File (ADDR.dbf). The linear feature is identified by the linear feature identifier (LINEARID) attribute, which can be used to relate the address range back to the name attributes of the feature in the Feature Names Relationship File or to the feature record in the Primary Roads, Primary and Secondary Roads, or All Roads Shapefiles. The edge to which a feature name applies can be determined by linking the feature name record to the All Lines Shapefile (EDGES.shp) using the permanent edge identifier (TLID) attribute. The address range identifier(s) (ARID) for a specific linear feature can be found by using the linear feature identifier (LINEARID) from the Feature Names Relationship File (FEATNAMES.dbf) through the Address Range / Feature Name Relationship File (ADDRFN.dbf).

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The Address Ranges Feature Shapefile (ADDRFEAT.dbf) contains the geospatial edge geometry and attributes of all unsuppressed address ranges for a county or county equivalent area. The term "address range" refers to the collection of all possible structure numbers from the first structure number to the last structure number and all numbers of a specified parity in between along an edge side relative to the direction in which the edge is coded. Single-address address ranges have been suppressed to maintain the confidentiality of the addresses they describe. Multiple coincident address range feature edge records are represented in the shapefile if more than one left or right address ranges are associated to the edge. The ADDRFEAT shapefile contains a record for each address range to street name combination. Address range associated to more than one street name are also represented by multiple coincident address range feature edge records. Note that the ADDRFEAT shapefile includes all unsuppressed address ranges compared to the All Lines Shapefile (EDGES.shp) which only includes the most inclusive address range associated with each side of a street edge. The TIGER/Line shapefile contain potential address ranges, not individual addresses. The address ranges in the TIGER/Line Files are potential ranges that include the full range of possible structure numbers even though the actual structures may not exist.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Norfolk County population distribution across 18 age groups. It lists the population in each age group along with the percentage population relative of the total population for Norfolk County. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Norfolk County by age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group in Norfolk County.

Key observations

The largest age group in Norfolk County, MA was for the group of age 55 to 59 years years with a population of 52,790 (7.29%), according to the ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. At the same time, the smallest age group in Norfolk County, MA was the 80 to 84 years years with a population of 14,362 (1.98%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group in consideration
• Population: The population for the specific age group in the Norfolk County is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the population of each age group as a proportion of Norfolk County total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Norfolk County Population by Age. You can refer the same here

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Essex County population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Essex County across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.

Key observations

In 2023, the population of Essex County was 810,089, a 0.45% increase year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Essex County population was 806,499, a decline of 0.11% compared to a population of 807,360 in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Essex County increased by 84,761. In this period, the peak population was 810,089 in the year 2023. The numbers suggest that the population has not reached its peak yet and is showing a trend of further growth. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2023

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2023)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Essex County is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Essex County population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Essex County Population by Year. You can refer the same here

About this dataset

Context

This list ranks the 14 counties in the Massachusetts by Non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander (NHPI) population, as estimated by the United States Census Bureau. It also highlights population changes in each counties over the past five years.

Content

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

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

Variables / Data Columns

• Rank by Non-Hispanic Pacific Islander Population: This column displays the rank of counties in the Massachusetts by their Non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander (NHPI) population, using the most recent ACS data available.
• counties: The counties for which the rank is shown in the previous column.
• Non-Hispanic Pacific Islander Population: The Non-Hispanic Pacific Islander population of the counties is shown in this column.
• % of Total counties Population: This shows what percentage of the total counties population identifies as Non-Hispanic Pacific Islander. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• % of Total Massachusetts Non-Hispanic Pacific Islander Population: This tells us how much of the entire Massachusetts Non-Hispanic Pacific Islander population lives in that counties. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• 5 Year Rank Trend: TThis column displays the rank trend across the last 5 years.

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Middlesex County population over the last 20 plus years. It lists the population for each year, along with the year on year change in population, as well as the change in percentage terms for each year. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population change of Middlesex County across the last two decades. For example, using this dataset, we can identify if the population is declining or increasing. If there is a change, when the population peaked, or if it is still growing and has not reached its peak. We can also compare the trend with the overall trend of United States population over the same period of time.

Key observations

In 2023, the population of Middlesex County was 1.62 million, a 0.44% increase year-by-year from 2022. Previously, in 2022, Middlesex County population was 1.62 million, a decline of 0.03% compared to a population of 1.62 million in 2021. Over the last 20 plus years, between 2000 and 2023, population of Middlesex County increased by 156,231. In this period, the peak population was 1.63 million in the year 2020. The numbers suggest that the population has already reached its peak and is showing a trend of decline. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates Program (PEP).

Data Coverage:

• From 2000 to 2023

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column displays the data year (Measured annually and for years 2000 to 2023)
• Population: The population for the specific year for the Middlesex County is shown in this column.
• Year on Year Change: This column displays the change in Middlesex County population for each year compared to the previous year.
• Change in Percent: This column displays the year on year change as a percentage. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Middlesex County Population by Year. You can refer the same here

About this dataset

Context

This list ranks the 14 counties in the Massachusetts by Hispanic Some Other Race (SOR) population, as estimated by the United States Census Bureau. It also highlights population changes in each counties over the past five years.

Content

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

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

Variables / Data Columns

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

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Plymouth County population by gender and age. The dataset can be utilized to understand the gender distribution and demographics of Plymouth County.

Content

The dataset constitues the following two datasets across these two themes

• Plymouth County, MA Population Breakdown by Gender
• Plymouth County, MA Population Breakdown by Gender and Age

Good to know

Margin of Error

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

Custom data

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

Inspiration

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