To estimate county of residence of Filipinx healthcare workers who died of COVID-19, we retrieved data from the Kanlungan website during the month of December 2020.22 In deciding who to include on the website, the AF3IRM team that established the Kanlungan website set two standards in data collection. First, the team found at least one source explicitly stating that the fallen healthcare worker was of Philippine ancestry; this was mostly media articles or obituaries sharing the life stories of the deceased. In a few cases, the confirmation came directly from the deceased healthcare worker's family member who submitted a tribute. Second, the team required a minimum of two sources to identify and announce fallen healthcare workers. We retrieved 86 US tributes from Kanlungan, but only 81 of them had information on county of residence. In total, 45 US counties with at least one reported tribute to a Filipinx healthcare worker who died of COVID-19 were identified for analysis and will hereafter be referred to as “Kanlungan counties.” Mortality data by county, race, and ethnicity came from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS).24 Updated weekly, this dataset is based on vital statistics data for use in conducting public health surveillance in near real time to provide provisional mortality estimates based on data received and processed by a specified cutoff date, before data are finalized and publicly released.25 We used the data released on December 30, 2020, which included provisional COVID-19 death counts from February 1, 2020 to December 26, 2020—during the height of the pandemic and prior to COVID-19 vaccines being available—for counties with at least 100 total COVID-19 deaths. During this time period, 501 counties (15.9% of the total 3,142 counties in all 50 states and Washington DC)26 met this criterion. Data on COVID-19 deaths were available for six major racial/ethnic groups: Non-Hispanic White, Non-Hispanic Black, Non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, Non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native, Non-Hispanic Asian (hereafter referred to as Asian American), and Hispanic. People with more than one race, and those with unknown race were included in the “Other” category. NCHS suppressed county-level data by race and ethnicity if death counts are less than 10. In total, 133 US counties reported COVID-19 mortality data for Asian Americans. These data were used to calculate the percentage of all COVID-19 decedents in the county who were Asian American. We used data from the 2018 American Community Survey (ACS) five-year estimates, downloaded from the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) to create county-level population demographic variables.27 IPUMS is publicly available, and the database integrates samples using ACS data from 2000 to the present using a high degree of precision.27 We applied survey weights to calculate the following variables at the county-level: median age among Asian Americans, average income to poverty ratio among Asian Americans, the percentage of the county population that is Filipinx, and the percentage of healthcare workers in the county who are Filipinx. Healthcare workers encompassed all healthcare practitioners, technical occupations, and healthcare service occupations, including nurse practitioners, physicians, surgeons, dentists, physical therapists, home health aides, personal care aides, and other medical technicians and healthcare support workers. County-level data were available for 107 out of the 133 counties (80.5%) that had NCHS data on the distribution of COVID-19 deaths among Asian Americans, and 96 counties (72.2%) with Asian American healthcare workforce data. The ACS 2018 five-year estimates were also the source of county-level percentage of the Asian American population (alone or in combination) who are Filipinx.8 In addition, the ACS provided county-level population counts26 to calculate population density (people per 1,000 people per square mile), estimated by dividing the total population by the county area, then dividing by 1,000 people. The county area was calculated in ArcGIS 10.7.1 using the county boundary shapefile and projected to Albers equal area conic (for counties in the US contiguous states), Hawai’i Albers Equal Area Conic (for Hawai’i counties), and Alaska Albers Equal Area Conic (for Alaska counties).20

Philippines Overseas Filipinos: Permanent: Americas: United States data was reported at 3,135,293.000 Person in 2013. This records an increase from the previous number of 3,096,656.000 Person for 2012. Philippines Overseas Filipinos: Permanent: Americas: United States data is updated yearly, averaging 2,326,675.000 Person from Dec 1997 (Median) to 2013, with 17 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 3,135,293.000 Person in 2013 and a record low of 1,694,362.000 Person in 1997. Philippines Overseas Filipinos: Permanent: Americas: United States data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Commission on Filipinos Overseas. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.G020: Stock Estimate of Overseas Filipinos.

Philippines Overseas Filipinos: Irregular: Americas: United States data was reported at 271,000.000 Person in 2013. This stayed constant from the previous number of 271,000.000 Person for 2012. Philippines Overseas Filipinos: Irregular: Americas: United States data is updated yearly, averaging 260,335.000 Person from Dec 1997 (Median) to 2013, with 17 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 844,046.000 Person in 1998 and a record low of 7,000.000 Person in 1997. Philippines Overseas Filipinos: Irregular: Americas: United States data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Commission on Filipinos Overseas. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.G025: Stock Estimate of Overseas Filipinos.

Philippines Overseas Filipinos: Temporary: Americas: United States data was reported at 129,383.000 Person in 2013. This records an increase from the previous number of 126,625.000 Person for 2012. Philippines Overseas Filipinos: Temporary: Americas: United States data is updated yearly, averaging 111,835.000 Person from Dec 1997 (Median) to 2013, with 17 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 129,383.000 Person in 2013 and a record low of 58,681.000 Person in 1998. Philippines Overseas Filipinos: Temporary: Americas: United States data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Commission on Filipinos Overseas. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.G020: Stock Estimate of Overseas Filipinos.

Benefits for Filipino Veterans

Philippines Exports to United States was US$12.12 Billion during 2024, according to the United Nations COMTRADE database on international trade. Philippines Exports to United States - data, historical chart and statistics - was last updated on July of 2025.

IIMMLA was supported by the Russell Sage Foundation. Since 1991, the Russell Sage Foundation has funded a program of research aimed at assessing how well the young adult offspring of recent immigrants are faring as they move through American schools and into the labor market. Two previous major studies have begun to tell us about the paths to incorporation of the children of contemporary immigrants: The Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Study (CILS), and the Immigrant Second Generation in New York study. The Immigration and Intergenerational Mobility in Metropolitan Los Angeles study is the third major initiative analyzing the progress of the new second generation in the United States. The Immigration and Intergenerational Mobility in Metropolitan Los Angeles (IIMMLA) study focused on young adult children of immigrants (1.5- and second-generation) in greater Los Angeles. IIMMLA investigated mobility among young adult (ages 20-39) children of immigrants in metropolitan Los Angeles and, in the case of the Mexican-origin population there, among young adult members of the third- or later generations. The five-county Los Angeles metropolitan area (Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside and San Bernardino counties) contains the largest concentrations of Mexicans, Salvadorans, Guatemalans, Filipinos, Chinese, Vietnamese, Koreans, and other nationalities in the United States. The diverse migration histories and modes of incorporation of these groups made the Los Angeles metropolitan area a strategic choice for a comparison study of the pathways of immigrant incorporation and mobility from one generation to the next. The IIMMLA study compared six foreign-born (1.5-generation) and foreign-parentage (second-generation) groups (Mexicans, Vietnamese, Filipinos, Koreans, Chinese, and Central Americans from Guatemala and El Salvador) with three native-born and native-parentage comparison groups (third- or later-generation Mexican Americans, and non-Hispanic Whites and Blacks). The targeted groups represent both the diversity of modes of incorporation in the United States and the range of occupational backgrounds and immigration status among contemporary immigrants (from professionals and entrepreneurs to laborers, refugees, and unauthorized migrants). The surveys provide basic demographic information as well as extensive data about socio-cultural orientation and mobility (e.g., language use, ethnic identity, religion, remittances, intermarriage, experiences of discrimination), economic mobility (e.g., parents' background, respondents' education, first and current job, wealth and income, encounters with the law), geographic mobility (childhood and present neighborhood of residence), and civic engagement and politics (political attitudes, voting behavior, as well as naturalization and transnational ties).

Note: For information on data collection, confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see the 2020 Island Areas Censuses Technical Documentation..Due to operational changes for military installation enumeration, the 2020 Census of Guam data tables reporting housing, social, and economic characteristics do not include housing units or populations living on Guam's U.S. military installations in the table universe. As a result, impacted 2020 data tables should not be compared to 2010 and other past census data tables reporting the same characteristics. The Census Bureau advises data users to verify table universes are the same before comparing data across census years. For more information about operational changes and the impacts on Guam's data products, see the 2020 Island Areas Censuses Technical Documentation..Due to COVID-19 restrictions impacting data collection for the 2020 Census of Guam, data users should consider the following when using Guam's data products: 1) Data tables reporting social and economic characteristics do not include the group quarters population in the table universe. As a result, impacted 2020 data tables should not be compared to 2010 and other past census data tables reporting the same characteristics. The Census Bureau advises data users to verify table universes are the same before comparing data across census years. For more information about data collection limitations and the impacts on Guam's data products, see the 2020 Island Areas Censuses Technical Documentation. 2) Cells in data tables will display the letter "N" when those data are not statistically reliable. A list of the geographic areas and data tables that will not have data displayed due to data quality concerns can be found in the 2020 Island Areas Censuses Technical Documentation. 3) The Census Bureau advises that data users consider high allocation rates while using the 2020 Census of Guam's available characteristics data. Allocation rates -- a measure of item nonresponse -- are higher than past censuses. Final counts can be adversely impacted when an item's allocation rate is high, and bias can be introduced if the characteristics of the nonrespondents differ from those reported by respondents. Allocation rates for Guam's key population and housing characteristics can be found in the 2020 Island Areas Censuses Technical Documentation. .[1] People who reported multiple responses may be counted in more than one of the race alone or in combination categories. For example, a respondent reporting Chamorro and Filipino is counted in the "Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone or in combination" category, the "Chamorro alone or in any combination" category, the "Asian alone or in combination" category, and the "Filipino alone or in any combination" category. These categories may add to more than the total population..[2] "Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone or in combination" includes respondents who reported a Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander group alone (e.g., Chamorro), multiple Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander groups (e.g., Chamorro and Chuukese), as well as respondents who reported one Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander group and one or more other groups classified as another race (e.g., Chamorro and White)..[3] "Asian alone or in combination" includes respondents who reported an Asian group alone (e.g., Filipino), multiple Asian groups (e.g., Filipino and Korean), as well as respondents who reported an Asian group and one or more other groups classified as another race (e.g., Filipino and White)..[4] "Other races alone or in combination" includes respondents who reported one race group or multiple race groups that were not classified as Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander or Asian (e.g., White and a Black or African American group such as Jamaican), as well as respondents who reported one group that was not classified as Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander or Asian and another that was classified as Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander or Asian (e.g., Jamaican and Chamorro)..[5] The most common reported Hispanic origin group in the 2010 Census of Guam..[6] This category includes people who reported Cuban, Spaniard, and other detailed Hispanic responses. It also includes people who reported "Hispanic" or "Latino" and other general terms..[7] "Spouse" represents spouse of the householder. It does not reflect all spouses in a household..[8] "Family households" consist of a householder and one or more other people related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption..Explanation of Symbols: 1.An "-" means the statistic could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of observations. 2. An "-" following a median estimate means the median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution.3. An "+" following a median estimate means the median falls in the upper interval of an open-ended di...

ObjectiveTo evaluate the validity and reliability of the Philippines (Tagalog) Short Form 36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2®) standard questionnaire among Filipinos residing in two cities. Study Design and SettingThe official Philippines (Tagalog) SF-36v2 standard (4-week recall) version was pretested on 30 participants followed by formal and informal cognitive debriefing. To obtain the feedback on translation by bilingual respondents, each SF-36v2 question was stated first in English followed by Tagalog. No revisions to the original questionnaire were needed except that participants thought it was appropriate to incorporate "po" in the instructions to make it more polite. Face-to-face interviews of 562 participants aged 20-50 years living in two barangays (villages) in the highly urbanized city of Makati City (Metro Manila) and in urban and rural barangays in Tanauan City (province of Batangas) were subsequently conducted. Content validity, item level validity, reliability and factor structure of the SF-36v2 (Tagalog) were examined. ResultsContent validity of the SF-36v2 was assessed to be adequate for assessing health status among Filipinos. Item means of Philippines (Tagalog) SF-36v2 were similar with comparable scales in the US English, Singapore (English and Chinese) and Thai SF-36 version 1. Item-scale correlation exceeded 0.4 for all items except the bathing item in PF (correlation: 0.31). In exploratory factor analysis, the US two-component model was supported. However, in confirmatory factor analysis, the Japanese three-component model fit the Tagalog data better than the US two-component model. ConclusionsThe Philippines (Tagalog) SF-36v2 is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring health status among residents of Makati City (Metro Manila) and Tanauan City (Province of Batangas).

海外菲律宾人：永久：美洲：美国在12-01-2013达3,135,293.000人，相较于12-01-2012的3,096,656.000人有所增长。海外菲律宾人：永久：美洲：美国数据按年更新，12-01-1997至12-01-2013期间平均值为2,326,675.000人，共17份观测结果。该数据的历史最高值出现于12-01-2013，达3,135,293.000人，而历史最低值则出现于12-01-1997，为1,694,362.000人。CEIC提供的海外菲律宾人：永久：美洲：美国数据处于定期更新的状态，数据来源于Commission on Filipinos Overseas，数据归类于Global Database的菲律宾 – 表 PH.G019：海外菲律宾人股票估计。

Number of people belonging to a visible minority group as defined by the Employment Equity Act and, if so, the visible minority group to which the person belongs. The Employment Equity Act defines visible minorities as 'persons, other than Aboriginal peoples, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour.' The visible minority population consists mainly of the following groups: South Asian, Chinese, Black, Filipino, Latin American, Arab, Southeast Asian, West Asian, Korean and Japanese.

海外菲律宾人：不规则的：美洲：美国在12-01-2013达271,000.000人，相较于12-01-2012的271,000.000人保持不变。海外菲律宾人：不规则的：美洲：美国数据按年更新，12-01-1997至12-01-2013期间平均值为260,335.000人，共17份观测结果。该数据的历史最高值出现于12-01-1998，达844,046.000人，而历史最低值则出现于12-01-1997，为7,000.000人。CEIC提供的海外菲律宾人：不规则的：美洲：美国数据处于定期更新的状态，数据来源于Commission on Filipinos Overseas，数据归类于全球数据库的菲律宾 – 表 PH.G023：海外菲律宾人股票估计。