About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents median income data over a decade or more for males and females categorized by Total, Full-Time Year-Round (FT), and Part-Time (PT) employment in California. It showcases annual income, providing insights into gender-specific income distributions and the disparities between full-time and part-time work. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based pay disparity trends and explore the variations in income for male and female individuals.

Key observations: Insights from 2023

Based on our analysis ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates, we present the following observations: - All workers, aged 15 years and older: In California, the median income for all workers aged 15 years and older, regardless of work hours, was $14,875 for males and $13,300 for females.

Based on these incomes, we observe a gender gap percentage of approximately 11%, indicating a significant disparity between the median incomes of males and females in California. Women, regardless of work hours, still earn 89 cents to each dollar earned by men, highlighting an ongoing gender-based wage gap.

Remarkably, across all roles, including non-full-time employment, women displayed a similar gender pay gap percentage. This indicates a consistent gender pay gap scenario across various employment types in California, showcasing a consistent income pattern irrespective of employment status.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. All incomes have been adjusting for inflation and are presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars.

Gender classifications include:

• Male
• Female

Employment type classifications include:

• Full-time, year-round: A full-time, year-round worker is a person who worked full time (35 or more hours per week) and 50 or more weeks during the previous calendar year.
• Part-time: A part-time worker is a person who worked less than 35 hours per week during the previous calendar year.

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column presents the data year. Expected values are 2010 to 2023
• Male Total Income: Annual median income, for males regardless of work hours
• Male FT Income: Annual median income, for males working full time, year-round
• Male PT Income: Annual median income, for males working part time
• Female Total Income: Annual median income, for females regardless of work hours
• Female FT Income: Annual median income, for females working full time, year-round
• Female PT Income: Annual median income, for females working part time

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 California median household income by race. You can refer the same here

More than 39 million people and 14.2 million households span more than 163,000 square miles of Californian’s urban, suburban and rural communities. California has the fifth largest economy in the world and is the most populous state in the nation, with nation-leading diversity in race, ethnicity, language and socioeconomic conditions. These characteristics make California amazingly unique amongst all 50 states, but also present significant challenges to counting every person and every household, no matter the census year. A complete and accurate count of a state’s population in a decennial census is essential. The results of the 2020 Census will inform decisions about allocating hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funding to communities across the country for hospitals, fire departments, school lunch programs and other critical programs and services. The data collected by the United States Census Bureau (referred hereafter as U.S. Census Bureau) also determines the number of seats each state has in the U.S. House of Representatives and will be used to redraw State Assembly and Senate boundaries. California launched a comprehensive Complete Count Census 2020 Campaign (referred to hereafter as the Campaign) to support an accurate and complete count of Californians in the 2020 Census. Due to the state’s unique diversity and with insights from past censuses, the Campaign placed special emphasis on the hardest-tocount Californians and those least likely to participate in the census. The California Complete Count – Census 2020 Office (referred to hereafter as the Census Office) coordinated the State’s operations to complement work done nationally by the U.S. Census Bureau to reach those households most likely to be missed because of barriers, operational or motivational, preventing people from filling out the census. The Campaign, which began in 2017, included key phases, titled Educate, Motivate and Activate. Each of these phases were designed to make sure all Californians knew about the census, how to respond, their information was safe and their participation would help their communities for the next 10 years.

This dataset contains counts of deaths for California counties based on information entered on death certificates. Final counts are derived from static data and include out-of-state deaths to California residents, whereas provisional counts are derived from incomplete and dynamic data. Provisional counts are based on the records available when the data was retrieved and may not represent all deaths that occurred during the time period. Deaths involving injuries from external or environmental forces, such as accidents, homicide and suicide, often require additional investigation that tends to delay certification of the cause and manner of death. This can result in significant under-reporting of these deaths in provisional data.

The final data tables include both deaths that occurred in each California county regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence) and deaths to residents of each California county (by residence), whereas the provisional data table only includes deaths that occurred in each county regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence). The data are reported as totals, as well as stratified by age, gender, race-ethnicity, and death place type. Deaths due to all causes (ALL) and selected underlying cause of death categories are provided. See temporal coverage for more information on which combinations are available for which years.

The cause of death categories are based solely on the underlying cause of death as coded by the International Classification of Diseases. The underlying cause of death is defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as "the disease or injury which initiated the train of events leading directly to death, or the circumstances of the accident or violence which produced the fatal injury." It is a single value assigned to each death based on the details as entered on the death certificate. When more than one cause is listed, the order in which they are listed can affect which cause is coded as the underlying cause. This means that similar events could be coded with different underlying causes of death depending on variations in how they were entered. Consequently, while underlying cause of death provides a convenient comparison between cause of death categories, it may not capture the full impact of each cause of death as it does not always take into account all conditions contributing to the death.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the detailed breakdown of the count of individuals within distinct income brackets, categorizing them by gender (men and women) and employment type - full-time (FT) and part-time (PT), offering valuable insights into the diverse income landscapes within California. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based income distribution within the California population, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..

Key observations

• Employment patterns: Within California, among individuals aged 15 years and older with income, there were 13.93 million men and 13.07 million women in the workforce. Among them, 7.74 million men were engaged in full-time, year-round employment, while 5.52 million women were in full-time, year-round roles.
• Annual income under $24,999: Of the male population working full-time, 7.12% fell within the income range of under $24,999, while 9.32% of the female population working full-time was represented in the same income bracket.
• Annual income above $100,000: 35.40% of men in full-time roles earned incomes exceeding $100,000, while 27.36% of women in full-time positions earned within this income bracket.
• Refer to the research insights for more key observations on more income brackets ( Annual income under $24,999, Annual income between $25,000 and $49,999, Annual income between $50,000 and $74,999, Annual income between $75,000 and $99,999 and Annual income above $100,000) and employment types (full-time year-round and part-time)

Content

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

Income brackets:

• $1 to $2,499 or loss
• $2,500 to $4,999
• $5,000 to $7,499
• $7,500 to $9,999
• $10,000 to $12,499
• $12,500 to $14,999
• $15,000 to $17,499
• $17,500 to $19,999
• $20,000 to $22,499
• $22,500 to $24,999
• $25,000 to $29,999
• $30,000 to $34,999
• $35,000 to $39,999
• $40,000 to $44,999
• $45,000 to $49,999
• $50,000 to $54,999
• $55,000 to $64,999
• $65,000 to $74,999
• $75,000 to $99,999
• $100,000 or more

Variables / Data Columns

• Income Bracket: This column showcases 20 income brackets ranging from $1 to $100,000+..
• Full-Time Males: The count of males employed full-time year-round and earning within a specified income bracket
• Part-Time Males: The count of males employed part-time and earning within a specified income bracket
• Full-Time Females: The count of females employed full-time year-round and earning within a specified income bracket
• Part-Time Females: The count of females employed part-time and earning within a specified income bracket

Employment type classifications include:

• Full-time, year-round: A full-time, year-round worker is a person who worked full time (35 or more hours per week) and 50 or more weeks during the previous calendar year.
• Part-time: A part-time worker is a person who worked less than 35 hours per week during the previous calendar year.

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 California median household income by race. You can refer the same here

A dataset listing California counties by population for 2024.

This dataset identifies the number of individually-owned domestic wells, and the number of households relying upon domestic water supply in the state of California. The number of wells and households are summarized for each Public Land Survey System (PLSS) section. The well locations were determined from more than 635,000 scanned well-completion reports (WCRs) provided by the California Department of Water Resources in 2011. This is only a partial sample of the total number of WCRs (estimated at 1 to 2 million in total). The number of domestic wells was estimated based upon a spatially distributed and randomized survey that determined the Township Ratio (TR) for each township in the state (4,692 in total). Each township generally contains 36 sections (6 x 6). The total number of wells within a section was multiplied by the corresponding TR to estimate the number of domestic wells within each section. See the "TRatio" column in the attribute table. Each section within the same township will have the same Township Ratio. The domestic household data are from the 1990 US Census. These data were provided at the census tract level and were subsequently aggregated to PLSS sections that contained a domestic well. In the case where census tract data identified households using domestic supply, but there were no domestic wells within the tract, the household data were distributed evenly to all sections within the tract. In San Luis Obispo County, the scanned WCRs were incomplete. Therefore, a surrogate method was used. The total number of households reported by the 1990 census did not change; only the distribution of where those households existed within the tract changed. A WCR was considered an individually-owned domestic well if the primary use of the well was identified as being domestic, the owner was an individual, and the well was not destroyed as of 1990. See the larger body work (Johnson and Belitz 2015) for more details.

Introduction

California Health and Human Services (CalHHS) single and multi-program participation counts with demographics by year and geography, both the Annual (cumulative) and July (point in time) files. The data dictionary for each file is loaded as a resource within the CSV preview page.

Background

The CalHHS Program Data and Dashboard contain participation data related to seven California Health & Human Services agency programs: CalWORKs, CalFresh, In-Home Supportive Services, Foster Care, Medi-Cal (California Medicaid), Women, Infants, & Children, and Developmental Services. Users are able to view these data at the county level or by legislative district level (U.S. Congress, State Assembly, State Senate). Statistics on persons served, persons per case, average grant amount, and basic demographics are presented in both tabular spreadsheets and customizable visualizations by program. In addition to presenting statistics for each program separately, the dashboard also provides data on the number of individuals participating in more than one program at the same time in a given district or county.

Methodology

The Children's Data Network has prepared a methodology document for the process involved in creating this data. If you would like to review the methodology used, please click the link below to visit the CalHHS Records Reconciliation Methodology. https://data.chhs.ca.gov/pages/calhhs-program-counts-methodology

50 year Projected Urban Growth scenarios. Base year is 2000. Projected year in this dataset is 2050.

By 2020, most forecasters agree, California will be home to between 43 and 46 million residents-up from 35 million today. Beyond 2020 the size of California's population is less certain. Depending on the composition of the population, and future fertility and migration rates, California's 2050 population could be as little as 50 million or as much as 70 million. One hundred years from now, if present trends continue, California could conceivably have as many as 90 million residents. Where these future residents will live and work is unclear. For most of the 20th Century, two-thirds of Californians have lived south of the Tehachapi Mountains and west of the San Jacinto Mountains-in that part of the state commonly referred to as Southern California. Yet most of coastal Southern California is already highly urbanized, and there is relatively little vacant land available for new development. More recently, slow-growth policies in Northern California and declining developable land supplies in Southern California are squeezing ever more of the state's population growth into the San Joaquin Valley. How future Californians will occupy the landscape is also unclear. Over the last fifty years, the state's population has grown increasingly urban. Today, nearly 95 percent of Californians live in metropolitan areas, mostly at densities less than ten persons per acre. Recent growth patterns have strongly favored locations near freeways, most of which where built in the 1950s and 1960s. With few new freeways on the planning horizon, how will California's future growth organize itself in space? By national standards, California's large urban areas are already reasonably dense, and economic theory suggests that densities should increase further as California's urban regions continue to grow. In practice, densities have been rising in some urban counties, but falling in others.

These are important issues as California plans its long-term future. Will California have enough land of the appropriate types and in the right locations to accommodate its projected population growth? Will future population growth consume ever-greater amounts of irreplaceable resource lands and habitat? Will jobs continue decentralizing, pushing out the boundaries of metropolitan areas? Will development densities be sufficient to support mass transit, or will future Californians be stuck in perpetual gridlock? Will urban and resort and recreational growth in the Sierra Nevada and Trinity Mountain regions lead to the over-fragmentation of precious natural habitat? How much water will be needed by California's future industries, farms, and residents, and where will that water be stored? Where should future highway, transit, and high-speed rail facilities and rights-of-way be located? Most of all, how much will all this growth cost, both economically, and in terms of changes in California's quality of life? Clearly, the more precise our current understanding of how and where California is likely to grow, the sooner and more inexpensively appropriate lands can be acquired for purposes of conservation, recreation, and future facility siting. Similarly, the more clearly future urbanization patterns can be anticipated, the greater our collective ability to undertake sound city, metropolitan, rural, and bioregional planning.

Consider two scenarios for the year 2100. In the first, California's population would grow to 80 million persons and would occupy the landscape at an average density of eight persons per acre, the current statewide urban average. Under this scenario, and assuming that 10% percent of California's future population growth would occur through infill-that is, on existing urban land-California's expanding urban population would consume an additional 5.06 million acres of currently undeveloped land. As an alternative, assume the share of infill development were increased to 30%, and that new population were accommodated at a density of about 12 persons per acre-which is the current average density of the City of Los Angeles. Under this second scenario, California's urban population would consume an additional 2.6 million acres of currently undeveloped land. While both scenarios accommodate the same amount of population growth and generate large increments of additional urban development-indeed, some might say even the second scenario allows far too much growth and development-the second scenario is far kinder to California's unique natural landscape.

This report presents the results of a series of baseline population and urban growth projections for California's 38 urban counties through the year 2100. Presented in map and table form, these projections are based on extrapolations of current population trends and recent urban development trends. The next section, titled Approach, outlines the methodology and data used to develop the various projections. The following section, Baseline Scenario, reviews the projections themselves. A final section, entitled Baseline Impacts, quantitatively assesses the impacts of the baseline projections on wetland, hillside, farmland and habitat loss.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

California Commuting Mode Choice

Regional Disparities in Risk of Injury and Death

By Health [source]

About this dataset

This dataset contains data on the modes of transportation used by California residents aged 16 and older to commute to work. It includes data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Census and American Community Survey, covering all regions, counties, cities/towns, and census tracts in California. With each region showing detailed information regarding how its population travels to work (modes of transportation used), this dataset provides vital insight into the development of transport infrastructure in California over the past decade.

Unlike other states where private cars constitute an overwhelming majority of daily commuters (over 79% nationwide according to a 2015 survey), Californians have built up varied commuting habits – bicycles are commonly reported 5%, public transit stands at 15%, walking alone 4%, and carpooling is at 11%. Commuting plays a significant role on overall health—active modes such as biking or walking lead to healthier lifestyles that lower heart disease risks, obesity rates, diabetes prevalence; passengers on public transport also have a lower chance of injury in collisions compared with pedestrians or cyclists.

The consequences of inadequate planning for human mobility extend beyond physical health – it can also cause huge disparities between different racial groups such as Native Americans who experience four times higher death rate from pedestrian-car collisions than Whites or Asians; African-Americans and Latinos suffer twice as much as White people do when driving privately in their own cars due to air pollution hazards or lack thereof access to reliable public transportation system that could provide them with healthier alternatives. It is our hope that policymakers will use this dataset prominently stated by the Healthy Communities Data & Indicators Project - part of the Office Of Health Equity - while ensuring every resident’s right for safe mobility no matter their background!

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset contains information on the percent of Californians aged 16 and older who use different modes of transportation to get to work. The data is collected from the U.S. Census Bureau and American Community Survey, and covers all counties, cities/towns and census tracts in California.

In this dataset, there are several columns of data such as mode (mode of transport), race_eth_name (name of the race/ethnicity), region_code (code for the region) and pop_total (total population). This makes it possible to look at relations between transportation choice and demographic factors like gender or ethnicity, or comparison between regions within California regarding commuting habits.

The purpose of this dataset is to provide information on how Californians travel to their jobs with respect to both geographical area as well as demographic characteristics. It allows studies into why certain areas might have higher usage rates for specific types of transport compared with others, how gender affects travel decisions, or which regions have access issues with public transit compared with driving for example.

To use this dataset you should start by familiarizing yourself with descriptive statistics such as percentages, hazard ratios etc., in order to understand each variable's contribution towards commuting trends more effectively. It might also help if you filter data by geographic area or personal characteristics first before performing more detailed analysis for more insightful results that can be used in policy-making when planning effective infrastructure investments related to transportation options over time or among differing populations within California state population levels noted here year-by-year across a decade period provided here

Research Ideas

• Creating interactive maps to visualize and compare the transportation methods of different race/ethnicities in California.
• Analyzing the transportation trends across regions, counties, cities/towns, and census tracts to forecast and plan for infrastructure investments.
• Comparing the risk ratio of pedestrian-car fatalities across different ethnic groups in order to address safety issues within underserved populations

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

**License: [Open Database License (ODbL) v1.0](https://opendatacommons.org/lice...

This dataset contains counts of live births for California counties based on information entered on birth certificates. Final counts are derived from static data and include out of state births to California residents, whereas provisional counts are derived from incomplete and dynamic data. Provisional counts are based on the records available when the data was retrieved and may not represent all births that occurred during the time period.

The final data tables include both births that occurred in California regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence) and births to California residents (by residence), whereas the provisional data table only includes births that occurred in California regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence). The data are reported as totals, as well as stratified by parent giving birth's age, parent giving birth's race-ethnicity, and birth place type. See temporal coverage for more information on which strata are available for which years.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the detailed breakdown of the count of individuals within distinct income brackets, categorizing them by gender (men and women) and employment type - full-time (FT) and part-time (PT), offering valuable insights into the diverse income landscapes within California. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based income distribution within the California population, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..

Key observations

• Employment patterns: Within California, among individuals aged 15 years and older with income, there were 1,921 men and 2,026 women in the workforce. Among them, 542 men were engaged in full-time, year-round employment, while 498 women were in full-time, year-round roles.
• Annual income under $24,999: Of the male population working full-time, 15.50% fell within the income range of under $24,999, while 24.90% of the female population working full-time was represented in the same income bracket.
• Annual income above $100,000: 10.33% of men in full-time roles earned incomes exceeding $100,000, while 7.43% of women in full-time positions earned within this income bracket.
• Refer to the research insights for more key observations on more income brackets ( Annual income under $24,999, Annual income between $25,000 and $49,999, Annual income between $50,000 and $74,999, Annual income between $75,000 and $99,999 and Annual income above $100,000) and employment types (full-time year-round and part-time)

Content

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

Income brackets:

• $1 to $2,499 or loss
• $2,500 to $4,999
• $5,000 to $7,499
• $7,500 to $9,999
• $10,000 to $12,499
• $12,500 to $14,999
• $15,000 to $17,499
• $17,500 to $19,999
• $20,000 to $22,499
• $22,500 to $24,999
• $25,000 to $29,999
• $30,000 to $34,999
• $35,000 to $39,999
• $40,000 to $44,999
• $45,000 to $49,999
• $50,000 to $54,999
• $55,000 to $64,999
• $65,000 to $74,999
• $75,000 to $99,999
• $100,000 or more

Variables / Data Columns

• Income Bracket: This column showcases 20 income brackets ranging from $1 to $100,000+..
• Full-Time Males: The count of males employed full-time year-round and earning within a specified income bracket
• Part-Time Males: The count of males employed part-time and earning within a specified income bracket
• Full-Time Females: The count of females employed full-time year-round and earning within a specified income bracket
• Part-Time Females: The count of females employed part-time and earning within a specified income bracket

Employment type classifications include:

• Full-time, year-round: A full-time, year-round worker is a person who worked full time (35 or more hours per week) and 50 or more weeks during the previous calendar year.
• Part-time: A part-time worker is a person who worked less than 35 hours per week during the previous calendar year.

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 California median household income by race. You can refer the same here

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

On 6/16/2023 CDPH replaced the booster measures with a new “Up to Date” measure based on CDC’s new recommendations, replacing the primary series, boosted, and bivalent booster metrics The definition of “primary series complete” has not changed and is based on previous recommendations that CDC has since simplified. A person cannot complete their primary series with a single dose of an updated vaccine. Whereas the booster measures were calculated using the eligible population as the denominator, the new up to date measure uses the total estimated population. Please note that the rates for some groups may change since the up to date measure is calculated differently than the previous booster and bivalent measures.

This data is from the same source as the Vaccine Progress Dashboard at https://covid19.ca.gov/vaccination-progress-data/ which summarizes vaccination data at the county level by county of residence. Where county of residence was not reported in a vaccination record, the county of provider that vaccinated the resident is included. This applies to less than 1% of vaccination records. The sum of county-level vaccinations does not equal statewide total vaccinations due to out-of-state residents vaccinated in California.

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

Totals for the Vaccine Progress Dashboard and this dataset may not match, as the Dashboard totals doses by Report Date and this dataset totals doses by Administration Date. Dose numbers may also change for a particular Administration Date as data is updated.

Previous updates:

• On March 3, 2023, with the release of HPI 3.0 in 2022, the previous equity scores have been updated to reflect more recent community survey information. This change represents an improvement to the way CDPH monitors health equity by using the latest and most accurate community data available. The HPI uses a collection of data sources and indicators to calculate a measure of community conditions ranging from the most to the least healthy based on economic, housing, and environmental measures.

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

• Starting on May 29, 2021 the methodology for calculating on-hand inventory in the shipped/delivered/on-hand dataset has changed. Please see the accompanying data dictionary for details. In addition, this dataset is now down to the ZIP code level.

UPDATE 1/7/2025: On June 28th 2023, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) changed its Stops Data Collection System (SDCS). As a result of this change, record identifiers have changed from the Department of Justice (DOJ) identifier to an internal record numbering system (referred to as "LEA Record ID"). The data that SFPD uploads to the DOJ system will contain the internal record number which can be used for joins with the data available on DataSF.

A. SUMMARY The San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) Stop Data was designed to capture information to comply with the Racial and Identity Profiling Act (RIPA), or California Assembly Bill (AB)953. SFPD officers collect specific information on each stop, including elements of the stop, circumstances and the perceived identity characteristics of the individual(s) stopped. The information obtained by officers is reported to the California Department of Justice. This dataset includes data on stops starting on July 1st, 2018, which is when the data collection program went into effect. Read the detailed overview for this dataset here.

B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED By the end of each shift, officers enter all stop data into the Stop Data Collection System, which is automatically submitted to the California Department of Justice (CA DOJ). Once a quarter the Department receives a stops data file from CA DOJ. The SFPD conducts several transformations of this data to ensure privacy, accuracy and compliance with State law and regulation. For increased usability, text descriptions have also been added for several data fields which include numeric codes (including traffic, suspicion, citation, and custodial arrest offense codes, and actions taken as a result of a stop). See the data dictionaries below for explanations of all coded data fields. Read more about the data collection, and transformation, including geocoding and PII cleaning processes, in the detailed overview of this dataset.

C. UPDATE PROCESS Information is updated on a quarterly basis.

D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET This dataset includes information about police stops that occurred, including some details about the person(s) stopped, and what happened during the stop. Each row is a person stopped with a record identifier for the stop and a unique identifier for the person. A single stop may involve multiple people and may produce more than one associated unique identifier for the same record identifier. A certain percentage of stops have stop information that can’t be geocoded. This may be due to errors in data input at the officer level (typos in entry or providing an address that doesn't exist). More often, this is due to officers providing a level of detail that isn't codable to a geographic coordinate - most often at the Airport (ie: Terminal 3, door 22.) In these cases, the location of the stops is coded as unknown.

E. DATA DICTIONARIES CJIS Offense Codes data look up table

Look up table for other coded data fields

This table contains data on the percent of residents aged 16 years and older mode of transportation to work for California, its regions, counties, cities/towns, and census tracts. Data is from the U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Census and American Community Survey. The table is part of a series of indicators in the Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project of the Office of Health Equity. Commute trips to work represent 19% of travel miles in the United States. The predominant mode – the automobile - offers extraordinary personal mobility and independence, but it is also associated with health hazards, such as air pollution, motor vehicle crashes, pedestrian injuries and fatalities, and sedentary lifestyles. Automobile commuting has been linked to stress-related health problems. Active modes of transport – bicycling and walking alone and in combination with public transit – offer opportunities for physical activity, which is associated with lowering rates of heart disease and stroke, diabetes, colon and breast cancer, dementia and depression. Risk of injury and death in collisions are higher in urban areas with more concentrated vehicle and pedestrian activity. Bus and rail passengers have a lower risk of injury in collisions than motorcyclists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Minority communities bear a disproportionate share of pedestrian-car fatalities; Native American male pedestrians experience four times the death rate Whites or Asian pedestrians, and African-Americans and Latinos experience twice the rate as Whites or Asians. More information about the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the About/Attachments section.

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Life Expectancy (EQ6)

FULL MEASURE NAME Life Expectancy

LAST UPDATED April 2017

DESCRIPTION Life expectancy refers to the average number of years a newborn is expected to live if mortality patterns remain the same. The measure reflects the mortality rate across a population for a point in time.

DATA SOURCE State of California, Department of Health: Death Records (1990-2013) No link

California Department of Finance: Population Estimates Annual Intercensal Population Estimates (1990-2010) Table P-2: County Population by Age (2010-2013) http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/

CONTACT INFORMATION vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) Life expectancy is commonly used as a measure of the health of a population. Life expectancy does not reflect how long any given individual is expected to live; rather, it is an artificial measure that captures an aspect of the mortality rates across a population. Vital Signs measures life expectancy at birth (as opposed to cohort life expectancy). A statistical model was used to estimate life expectancy for Bay Area counties and Zip codes based on current life tables which require both age and mortality data. A life table is a table which shows, for each age, the survivorship of a people from a certain population.

Current life tables were created using death records and population estimates by age. The California Department of Public Health provided death records based on the California death certificate information. Records include age at death and residential Zip code. Single-year age population estimates at the regional- and county-level comes from the California Department of Finance population estimates and projections for ages 0-100+. Population estimates for ages 100 and over are aggregated to a single age interval. Using this data, death rates in a population within age groups for a given year are computed to form unabridged life tables (as opposed to abridged life tables). To calculate life expectancy, the probability of dying between the jth and (j+1)st birthday is assumed uniform after age 1. Special consideration is taken to account for infant mortality. For the Zip code-level life expectancy calculation, it is assumed that postal Zip codes share the same boundaries as Zip Code Census Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs). More information on the relationship between Zip codes and ZCTAs can be found at https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/zctas.html. Zip code-level data uses three years of mortality data to make robust estimates due to small sample size. Year 2013 Zip code life expectancy estimates reflects death records from 2011 through 2013. 2013 is the last year with available mortality data. Death records for Zip codes with zero population (like those associated with P.O. Boxes) were assigned to the nearest Zip code with population. Zip code population for 2000 estimates comes from the Decennial Census. Zip code population for 2013 estimates are from the American Community Survey (5-Year Average). The ACS provides Zip code population by age in five-year age intervals. Single-year age population estimates were calculated by distributing population within an age interval to single-year ages using the county distribution. Counties were assigned to Zip codes based on majority land-area.

Zip codes in the Bay Area vary in population from over 10,000 residents to less than 20 residents. Traditional life expectancy estimation (like the one used for the regional- and county-level Vital Signs estimates) cannot be used because they are highly inaccurate for small populations and may result in over/underestimation of life expectancy. To avoid inaccurate estimates, Zip codes with populations of less than 5,000 were aggregated with neighboring Zip codes until the merged areas had a population of more than 5,000. In this way, the original 305 Bay Area Zip codes were reduced to 218 Zip code areas for 2013 estimates. Next, a form of Bayesian random-effects analysis was used which established a prior distribution of the probability of death at each age using the regional distribution. This prior is used to shore up the life expectancy calculations where data were sparse.

This dataset identifies California’s eligibility groups by aid code. California uses aid codes to account for eligibility group populations and the eligibility requirements, scope of benefits, services, costs, claims, encounter data, and managed care arrangements related to those populations. Aid codes in this dataset are mapped to the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS) eligibility group descriptions and codes. California uses this mapping to submit claims data, enrollee encounter data, and supporting information to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), as required by Section 4735 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and Section 6504 of the Affordable Care Act for the purpose of program integrity, program oversight, and administration. This dataset includes aid codes that do not have Medi-Cal benefits or have benefits and are not federal programs. Some aid codes may appear to be identical but possess distinct benefits or grouping factors. An aid code may appear more than once if multiple populations are represented in one aid code and can be identified and mapped to distinct T-MSIS groups.

Less than high school graduate Poverty Rate Statistics for 2023. This is part of a larger dataset covering poverty in California by age, education, race, gender, work experience and more.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents median income data over a decade or more for males and females categorized by Total, Full-Time Year-Round (FT), and Part-Time (PT) employment in California township. It showcases annual income, providing insights into gender-specific income distributions and the disparities between full-time and part-time work. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based pay disparity trends and explore the variations in income for male and female individuals.

Key observations: Insights from 2023

Based on our analysis ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates, we present the following observations: - All workers, aged 15 years and older: In California township, the median income for all workers aged 15 years and older, regardless of work hours, was $40,772 for males and $25,179 for females.

These income figures highlight a substantial gender-based income gap in California township. Women, regardless of work hours, earn 62 cents for each dollar earned by men. This significant gender pay gap, approximately 38%, underscores concerning gender-based income inequality in the township of California township.

Surprisingly, the gender pay gap percentage was higher across all roles, including non-full-time employment, for women compared to men. This suggests that full-time employment offers a more equitable income scenario for women compared to other employment patterns in California township.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. All incomes have been adjusting for inflation and are presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars.

Gender classifications include:

• Male
• Female

Employment type classifications include:

• Full-time, year-round: A full-time, year-round worker is a person who worked full time (35 or more hours per week) and 50 or more weeks during the previous calendar year.
• Part-time: A part-time worker is a person who worked less than 35 hours per week during the previous calendar year.

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column presents the data year. Expected values are 2010 to 2023
• Male Total Income: Annual median income, for males regardless of work hours
• Male FT Income: Annual median income, for males working full time, year-round
• Male PT Income: Annual median income, for males working part time
• Female Total Income: Annual median income, for females regardless of work hours
• Female FT Income: Annual median income, for females working full time, year-round
• Female PT Income: Annual median income, for females working part time

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 California township median household income by race. You can refer the same here