House Price Index YoY in the United States decreased to 3 percent in April from 3.90 percent in March of 2025. This dataset includes a chart with historical data for the United States FHFA House Price Index YoY.

Housing Index in Portugal increased to 247.05 points in the first quarter of 2025 from 235.68 points in the fourth quarter of 2024. This dataset provides - Portugal House Price Index - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

In 2017, the County Department of Economic Development, in conjunction with Reinvestment Fund, completed the 2016 Market Value Analysis (MVA) for Allegheny County. A similar MVA was completed with the Pittsburgh Urban Redevelopment Authority in 2016. The Market Value Analysis (MVA) offers an approach for community revitalization; it recommends applying interventions not only to where there is a need for development but also in places where public investment can stimulate private market activity and capitalize on larger public investment activities. The MVA is a unique tool for characterizing markets because it creates an internally referenced index of a municipality’s residential real estate market. It identifies areas that are the highest demand markets as well as areas of greatest distress, and the various markets types between. The MVA offers insight into the variation in market strength and weakness within and between traditional community boundaries because it uses Census block groups as the unit of analysis. Where market types abut each other on the map becomes instructive about the potential direction of market change, and ultimately, the appropriateness of types of investment or intervention strategies. The 2016 Allegheny County MVA does not include the City of Pittsburgh, which was characterized at the same time in the fourth update of the City of Pittsburgh’s MVA. All calculations herein therefore do not include the City of Pittsburgh. While the methodology between the City and County MVA's are very similar, the classification of communities will differ, and so the data between the two should not be used interchangeably. Allegheny County's MVA utilized data that helps to define the local real estate market. Most data used covers the 2013-2016 period, and data used in the analysis includes: •Residential Real Estate Sales; • Mortgage Foreclosures; • Residential Vacancy; • Parcel Year Built; • Parcel Condition; • Owner Occupancy; and • Subsidized Housing Units. The MVA uses a statistical technique known as cluster analysis, forming groups of areas (i.e., block groups) that are similar along the MVA descriptors, noted above. The goal is to form groups within which there is a similarity of characteristics within each group, but each group itself different from the others. Using this technique, the MVA condenses vast amounts of data for the universe of all properties to a manageable, meaningful typology of market types that can inform area-appropriate programs and decisions regarding the allocation of resources. During the research process, staff from the County and Reinvestment Fund spent an extensive amount of effort ensuring the data and analysis was accurate. In addition to testing the data, staff physically examined different areas to verify the data sets being used were appropriate indicators and the resulting MVA categories accurately reflect the market. Please refer to the report (included here as a pdf) for more information about the data, methodology, and findings.

Housing Index in the United Kingdom decreased to 511.60 points in June from 511.80 points in May of 2025. This dataset provides - United Kingdom House Price Index - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

Boxplots are useful displays that convey rough information about the distribution of a variable. Boxplots were designed to be drawn by hand and work best for small datasets, where detailed estimates of tail behavior beyond the quartiles may not be trustworthy. Larger datasets afford more precise estimates of tail behavior, but boxplots do not take advantage of this precision, instead presenting large numbers of extreme, though not unexpected, observations. Letter-value plots address this problem by including more detailed information about the tails using “letter values,” an order statistic defined by Tukey. Boxplots display the first two letter values (the median and quartiles); letter-value plots display further letter values so far as they are reliable estimates of their corresponding quantiles. We illustrate letter-value plots with real data that demonstrate their usefulness for large datasets. All graphics are created using the R package lvplot, and code and data are available in the supplementary materials.

Case Shiller Home Price Index in the United States increased to 341.48 points in April from 338.39 points in March of 2025. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - United States S&P Case-Shiller Home Price Index - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents median household incomes for various household sizes in Pulaski Township, Michigan, as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau. The dataset highlights the variation in median household income with the size of the family unit, offering valuable insights into economic trends and disparities within different household sizes, aiding in data analysis and decision-making.

Key observations

• Of the 7 household sizes (1 person to 7-or-more person households) reported by the census bureau, all of the household sizes were found in Pulaski township. Across the different household sizes in Pulaski township the mean income is $112,416, and the standard deviation is $77,842. The coefficient of variation (CV) is 69.24%. This high CV indicates high relative variability, suggesting that the incomes vary significantly across different sizes of households. Please note that the U.S. Census Bureau uses $250,001 as a JAM value to report incomes of $250,000 or more. In the case of Pulaski township, there were 1 household sizes where the JAM values were used. Thus, the numbers for the mean and standard deviation may not be entirely accurate and have a higher possibility of errors. However, to obtain an approximate estimate, we have used a value of $250,001 as the income for calculations, as reported in the datasets by the U.S. Census Bureau.
• In the most recent year, 2021, The smallest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income was 1-person households, with an income of $31,539. It then further increased to $270,229 for 7-person households, the largest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income.

https://i.neilsberg.com/ch/pulaski-township-mi-median-household-income-by-household-size.jpeg" alt="Pulaski Township, Michigan median household income, by household size (in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars)">

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Household Sizes:

• 1-person households
• 2-person households
• 3-person households
• 4-person households
• 5-person households
• 6-person households
• 7-or-more-person households

Variables / Data Columns

• Household Size: This column showcases 7 household sizes ranging from 1-person households to 7-or-more-person households (As mentioned above).
• Median Household Income: Median household income, in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars for the specific household size.

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 Pulaski township median household income. You can refer the same here

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,

Envestnet®| Yodlee®'s Online Purchase Data (Aggregate/Row) Panels consist of de-identified, near-real time (T+1) USA credit/debit/ACH transaction level data – offering a wide view of the consumer activity ecosystem. The underlying data is sourced from end users leveraging the aggregation portion of the Envestnet®| Yodlee®'s financial technology platform.

Envestnet | Yodlee Consumer Panels (Aggregate/Row) include data relating to millions of transactions, including ticket size and merchant location. The dataset includes de-identified credit/debit card and bank transactions (such as a payroll deposit, account transfer, or mortgage payment). Our coverage offers insights into areas such as consumer, TMT, energy, REITs, internet, utilities, ecommerce, MBS, CMBS, equities, credit, commodities, FX, and corporate activity. We apply rigorous data science practices to deliver key KPIs daily that are focused, relevant, and ready to put into production.

We offer free trials. Our team is available to provide support for loading, validation, sample scripts, or other services you may need to generate insights from our data.

Investors, corporate researchers, and corporates can use our data to answer some key business questions such as: - How much are consumers spending with specific merchants/brands and how is that changing over time? - Is the share of consumer spend at a specific merchant increasing or decreasing? - How are consumers reacting to new products or services launched by merchants? - For loyal customers, how is the share of spend changing over time? - What is the company’s market share in a region for similar customers? - Is the company’s loyal user base increasing or decreasing? - Is the lifetime customer value increasing or decreasing?

Additional Use Cases: - Use spending data to analyze sales/revenue broadly (sector-wide) or granular (company-specific). Historically, our tracked consumer spend has correlated above 85% with company-reported data from thousands of firms. Users can sort and filter by many metrics and KPIs, such as sales and transaction growth rates and online or offline transactions, as well as view customer behavior within a geographic market at a state or city level. - Reveal cohort consumer behavior to decipher long-term behavioral consumer spending shifts. Measure market share, wallet share, loyalty, consumer lifetime value, retention, demographics, and more.) - Study the effects of inflation rates via such metrics as increased total spend, ticket size, and number of transactions. - Seek out alpha-generating signals or manage your business strategically with essential, aggregated transaction and spending data analytics.

Use Cases Categories (Our data provides an innumerable amount of use cases, and we look forward to working with new ones): 1. Market Research: Company Analysis, Company Valuation, Competitive Intelligence, Competitor Analysis, Competitor Analytics, Competitor Insights, Customer Data Enrichment, Customer Data Insights, Customer Data Intelligence, Demand Forecasting, Ecommerce Intelligence, Employee Pay Strategy, Employment Analytics, Job Income Analysis, Job Market Pricing, Marketing, Marketing Data Enrichment, Marketing Intelligence, Marketing Strategy, Payment History Analytics, Price Analysis, Pricing Analytics, Retail, Retail Analytics, Retail Intelligence, Retail POS Data Analysis, and Salary Benchmarking

1. Investment Research: Financial Services, Hedge Funds, Investing, Mergers & Acquisitions (M&A), Stock Picking, Venture Capital (VC)

2. Consumer Analysis: Consumer Data Enrichment, Consumer Intelligence

3. Market Data: AnalyticsB2C Data Enrichment, Bank Data Enrichment, Behavioral Analytics, Benchmarking, Customer Insights, Customer Intelligence, Data Enhancement, Data Enrichment, Data Intelligence, Data Modeling, Ecommerce Analysis, Ecommerce Data Enrichment, Economic Analysis, Financial Data Enrichment, Financial Intelligence, Local Economic Forecasting, Location-based Analytics, Market Analysis, Market Analytics, Market Intelligence, Market Potential Analysis, Market Research, Market Share Analysis, Sales, Sales Data Enrichment, Sales Enablement, Sales Insights, Sales Intelligence, Spending Analytics, Stock Market Predictions, and Trend Analysis

Housing Index In the Euro Area increased to 150.39 points in the first quarter of 2025 from 148.47 points in the fourth quarter of 2024. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - Euro Area House Price Index - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.

Housing Index in Colombia increased to 142.37 points in the fourth quarter of 2024 from 139.93 points in the third quarter of 2024. This dataset provides - Colombia House Price Index - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

The data included in this publication depict components of wildfire risk specifically for populated areas in the United States. These datasets represent where people live in the United States and the in situ risk from wildfire, i.e., the risk at the location where the adverse effects take place.National wildfire hazard datasets of annual burn probability and fire intensity, generated by the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station and Pyrologix LLC, form the foundation of the Wildfire Risk to Communities data. Vegetation and wildland fuels data from LANDFIRE 2020 (version 2.2.0) were used as input to two different but related geospatial fire simulation systems. Annual burn probability was produced with the USFS geospatial fire simulator (FSim) at a relatively coarse cell size of 270 meters (m). To bring the burn probability raster data down to a finer resolution more useful for assessing hazard and risk to communities, we upsampled them to the native 30 m resolution of the LANDFIRE fuel and vegetation data. In this upsampling process, we also spread values of modeled burn probability into developed areas represented in LANDFIRE fuels data as non-burnable. Burn probability rasters represent landscape conditions as of the end of 2020. Fire intensity characteristics were modeled at 30 m resolution using a process that performs a comprehensive set of FlamMap runs spanning the full range of weather-related characteristics that occur during a fire season and then integrates those runs into a variety of results based on the likelihood of those weather types occurring. Before the fire intensity modeling, the LANDFIRE 2020 data were updated to reflect fuels disturbances occurring in 2021 and 2022. As such, the fire intensity datasets represent landscape conditions as of the end of 2022. The data products in this publication that represent where people live, reflect 2021 estimates of housing unit and population counts from the U.S. Census Bureau, combined with building footprint data from Onegeo and USA Structures, both reflecting 2022 conditions.The specific raster datasets included in this publication include:Building Count: Building Count is a 30-m raster representing the count of buildings in the building footprint dataset located within each 30-m pixel.Building Density: Building Density is a 30-m raster representing the density of buildings in the building footprint dataset (buildings per square kilometer [km²]).Building Coverage: Building Coverage is a 30-m raster depicting the percentage of habitable land area covered by building footprints.Population Count (PopCount): PopCount is a 30-m raster with pixel values representing residential population count (persons) in each pixel.Population Density (PopDen): PopDen is a 30-m raster of residential population density (people/km²).Housing Unit Count (HUCount): HUCount is a 30-m raster representing the number of housing units in each pixel.Housing Unit Density (HUDen): HUDen is a 30-m raster of housing-unit density (housing units/km²).Housing Unit Exposure (HUExposure): HUExposure is a 30-m raster that represents the expected number of housing units within a pixel potentially exposed to wildfire in a year. This is a long-term annual average and not intended to represent the actual number of housing units exposed in any specific year.Housing Unit Impact (HUImpact): HUImpact is a 30-m raster that represents the relative potential impact of fire to housing units at any pixel, if a fire were to occur. It is an index that incorporates the general consequences of fire on a home as a function of fire intensity and uses flame length probabilities from wildfire modeling to capture likely intensity of fire.Housing Unit Risk (HURisk): HURisk is a 30-m raster that integrates all four primary elements of wildfire risk - likelihood, intensity, susceptibility, and exposure - on pixels where housing unit density is greater than zero.Additional methodology documentation is provided with the data publication download. Metadata and Downloads.Note: Pixel values in this image service have been altered from the original raster dataset due to data requirements in web services. The service is intended primarily for data visualization. Relative values and spatial patterns have been largely preserved in the service, but users are encouraged to download the source data for quantitative analysis.

Notice: this is not the latest Heat Island Severity image service.This layer contains the relative heat severity for every pixel for every city in the United States, including Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. Heat Severity is a reclassified version of Heat Anomalies raster which is also published on this site. This data is generated from 30-meter Landsat 8 imagery band 10 (ground-level thermal sensor) from the summer of 2023.To explore previous versions of the data, visit the links below:Heat Severity - USA 2022Heat Severity - USA 2021Heat Severity - USA 2020Heat Severity - USA 2019Federal statistics over a 30-year period show extreme heat is the leading cause of weather-related deaths in the United States. Extreme heat exacerbated by urban heat islands can lead to increased respiratory difficulties, heat exhaustion, and heat stroke. These heat impacts significantly affect the most vulnerable—children, the elderly, and those with preexisting conditions.The purpose of this layer is to show where certain areas of cities are hotter than the average temperature for that same city as a whole. Severity is measured on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being a relatively mild heat area (slightly above the mean for the city), and 5 being a severe heat area (significantly above the mean for the city). The absolute heat above mean values are classified into these 5 classes using the Jenks Natural Breaks classification method, which seeks to reduce the variance within classes and maximize the variance between classes. Knowing where areas of high heat are located can help a city government plan for mitigation strategies.This dataset represents a snapshot in time. It will be updated yearly, but is static between updates. It does not take into account changes in heat during a single day, for example, from building shadows moving. The thermal readings detected by the Landsat 8 sensor are surface-level, whether that surface is the ground or the top of a building. Although there is strong correlation between surface temperature and air temperature, they are not the same. We believe that this is useful at the national level, and for cities that don’t have the ability to conduct their own hyper local temperature survey. Where local data is available, it may be more accurate than this dataset. Dataset SummaryThis dataset was developed using proprietary Python code developed at Trust for Public Land, running on the Descartes Labs platform through the Descartes Labs API for Python. The Descartes Labs platform allows for extremely fast retrieval and processing of imagery, which makes it possible to produce heat island data for all cities in the United States in a relatively short amount of time.What can you do with this layer?This layer has query, identify, and export image services available. Since it is served as an image service, it is not necessary to download the data; the service itself is data that can be used directly in any Esri geoprocessing tool that accepts raster data as input.In order to click on the image service and see the raw pixel values in a map viewer, you must be signed in to ArcGIS Online, then Enable Pop-Ups and Configure Pop-Ups.Using the Urban Heat Island (UHI) Image ServicesThe data is made available as an image service. There is a processing template applied that supplies the yellow-to-red or blue-to-red color ramp, but once this processing template is removed (you can do this in ArcGIS Pro or ArcGIS Desktop, or in QGIS), the actual data values come through the service and can be used directly in a geoprocessing tool (for example, to extract an area of interest). Following are instructions for doing this in Pro.In ArcGIS Pro, in a Map view, in the Catalog window, click on Portal. In the Portal window, click on the far-right icon representing Living Atlas. Search on the acronyms “tpl” and “uhi”. The results returned will be the UHI image services. Right click on a result and select “Add to current map” from the context menu. When the image service is added to the map, right-click on it in the map view, and select Properties. In the Properties window, select Processing Templates. On the drop-down menu at the top of the window, the default Processing Template is either a yellow-to-red ramp or a blue-to-red ramp. Click the drop-down, and select “None”, then “OK”. Now you will have the actual pixel values displayed in the map, and available to any geoprocessing tool that takes a raster as input. Below is a screenshot of ArcGIS Pro with a UHI image service loaded, color ramp removed, and symbology changed back to a yellow-to-red ramp (a classified renderer can also be used): A typical operation at this point is to clip out your area of interest. To do this, add your polygon shapefile or feature class to the map view, and use the Clip Raster tool to export your area of interest as a geoTIFF raster (file extension ".tif"). In the environments tab for the Clip Raster tool, click the dropdown for "Extent" and select "Same as Layer:", and select the name of your polygon. If you then need to convert the output raster to a polygon shapefile or feature class, run the Raster to Polygon tool, and select "Value" as the field.Other Sources of Heat Island InformationPlease see these websites for valuable information on heat islands and to learn about exciting new heat island research being led by scientists across the country:EPA’s Heat Island Resource CenterDr. Ladd Keith, University of ArizonaDr. Ben McMahan, University of Arizona Dr. Jeremy Hoffman, Science Museum of Virginia Dr. Hunter Jones, NOAA Daphne Lundi, Senior Policy Advisor, NYC Mayor's Office of Recovery and ResiliencyDisclaimer/FeedbackWith nearly 14,000 cities represented, checking each city's heat island raster for quality assurance would be prohibitively time-consuming, so Trust for Public Land checked a statistically significant sample size for data quality. The sample passed all quality checks, with about 98.5% of the output cities error-free, but there could be instances where the user finds errors in the data. These errors will most likely take the form of a line of discontinuity where there is no city boundary; this type of error is caused by large temperature differences in two adjacent Landsat scenes, so the discontinuity occurs along scene boundaries (see figure below). Trust for Public Land would appreciate feedback on these errors so that version 2 of the national UHI dataset can be improved. Contact Dale.Watt@tpl.org with feedback.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents median household incomes for various household sizes in Mishicot Town, Wisconsin, as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau. The dataset highlights the variation in median household income with the size of the family unit, offering valuable insights into economic trends and disparities within different household sizes, aiding in data analysis and decision-making.

Key observations

• Of the 7 household sizes (1 person to 7-or-more person households) reported by the census bureau, Mishicot town did not include 6-person households. Across the different household sizes in Mishicot town the mean income is $116,903, and the standard deviation is $79,545. The coefficient of variation (CV) is 68.04%. This high CV indicates high relative variability, suggesting that the incomes vary significantly across different sizes of households. Please note that the U.S. Census Bureau uses $250,001 as a JAM value to report incomes of $250,000 or more. In the case of Mishicot town, there were 1 household sizes where the JAM values were used. Thus, the numbers for the mean and standard deviation may not be entirely accurate and have a higher possibility of errors. However, to obtain an approximate estimate, we have used a value of $250,001 as the income for calculations, as reported in the datasets by the U.S. Census Bureau.
• In the most recent year, 2021, The smallest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income was 1-person households, with an income of $52,278. It then further increased to $270,229 for 7-person households, the largest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income.

https://i.neilsberg.com/ch/mishicot-town-wi-median-household-income-by-household-size.jpeg" alt="Mishicot Town, Wisconsin median household income, by household size (in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars)">

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Household Sizes:

• 1-person households
• 2-person households
• 3-person households
• 4-person households
• 5-person households
• 6-person households
• 7-or-more-person households

Variables / Data Columns

• Household Size: This column showcases 7 household sizes ranging from 1-person households to 7-or-more-person households (As mentioned above).
• Median Household Income: Median household income, in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars for the specific household size.

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 Mishicot town median household income. You can refer the same here

WARNING: This is a pre-release dataset and its fields names and data structures are subject to change. It should be considered pre-release until the end of 2024. Expected changes:Metadata is missing or incomplete for some layers at this time and will be continuously improved.We expect to update this layer roughly in line with CDTFA at some point, but will increase the update cadence over time as we are able to automate the final pieces of the process.This dataset is continuously updated as the source data from CDTFA is updated, as often as many times a month. If you require unchanging point-in-time data, export a copy for your own use rather than using the service directly in your applications.PurposeCounty and incorporated place (city) boundaries along with third party identifiers used to join in external data. Boundaries are from the authoritative source the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), altered to show the counties as one polygon. This layer displays the city polygons on top of the County polygons so the area isn"t interrupted. The GEOID attribute information is added from the US Census. GEOID is based on merged State and County FIPS codes for the Counties. Abbreviations for Counties and Cities were added from Caltrans Division of Local Assistance (DLA) data. Place Type was populated with information extracted from the Census. Names and IDs from the US Board on Geographic Names (BGN), the authoritative source of place names as published in the Geographic Name Information System (GNIS), are attached as well. Finally, the coastline is used to separate coastal buffers from the land-based portions of jurisdictions. This feature layer is for public use.Related LayersThis dataset is part of a grouping of many datasets:Cities: Only the city boundaries and attributes, without any unincorporated areasWith Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal BuffersCounties: Full county boundaries and attributes, including all cities within as a single polygonWith Coastal BuffersWithout Coastal BuffersCities and Full Counties: A merge of the other two layers, so polygons overlap within city boundaries. Some customers require this behavior, so we provide it as a separate service.With Coastal Buffers (this dataset)Without Coastal BuffersPlace AbbreviationsUnincorporated Areas (Coming Soon)Census Designated Places (Coming Soon)Cartographic CoastlinePolygonLine source (Coming Soon)Working with Coastal BuffersThe dataset you are currently viewing includes the coastal buffers for cities and counties that have them in the authoritative source data from CDTFA. In the versions where they are included, they remain as a second polygon on cities or counties that have them, with all the same identifiers, and a value in the COASTAL field indicating if it"s an ocean or a bay buffer. If you wish to have a single polygon per jurisdiction that includes the coastal buffers, you can run a Dissolve on the version that has the coastal buffers on all the fields except COASTAL, Area_SqMi, Shape_Area, and Shape_Length to get a version with the correct identifiers.Point of ContactCalifornia Department of Technology, Office of Digital Services, odsdataservices@state.ca.govField and Abbreviation DefinitionsCOPRI: county number followed by the 3-digit city primary number used in the Board of Equalization"s 6-digit tax rate area numbering systemPlace Name: CDTFA incorporated (city) or county nameCounty: CDTFA county name. For counties, this will be the name of the polygon itself. For cities, it is the name of the county the city polygon is within.Legal Place Name: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for area names published in the Geographic Name Information SystemGNIS_ID: The numeric identifier from the Board on Geographic Names that can be used to join these boundaries to other datasets utilizing this identifier.GEOID: numeric geographic identifiers from the US Census Bureau Place Type: Board on Geographic Names authorized nomenclature for boundary type published in the Geographic Name Information SystemPlace Abbr: CalTrans Division of Local Assistance abbreviations of incorporated area namesCNTY Abbr: CalTrans Division of Local Assistance abbreviations of county namesArea_SqMi: The area of the administrative unit (city or county) in square miles, calculated in EPSG 3310 California Teale Albers.COASTAL: Indicates if the polygon is a coastal buffer. Null for land polygons. Additional values include "ocean" and "bay".GlobalID: While all of the layers we provide in this dataset include a GlobalID field with unique values, we do not recommend you make any use of it. The GlobalID field exists to support offline sync, but is not persistent, so data keyed to it will be orphaned at our next update. Use one of the other persistent identifiers, such as GNIS_ID or GEOID instead.AccuracyCDTFA"s source data notes the following about accuracy:City boundary changes and county boundary line adjustments filed with the Board of Equalization per Government Code 54900. This GIS layer contains the boundaries of the unincorporated county and incorporated cities within the state of California. The initial dataset was created in March of 2015 and was based on the State Board of Equalization tax rate area boundaries. As of April 1, 2024, the maintenance of this dataset is provided by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates. The boundaries are continuously being revised to align with aerial imagery when areas of conflict are discovered between the original boundary provided by the California State Board of Equalization and the boundary made publicly available by local, state, and federal government. Some differences may occur between actual recorded boundaries and the boundaries used for sales and use tax purposes. The boundaries in this map are representations of taxing jurisdictions for the purpose of determining sales and use tax rates and should not be used to determine precise city or county boundary line locations. COUNTY = county name; CITY = city name or unincorporated territory; COPRI = county number followed by the 3-digit city primary number used in the California State Board of Equalization"s 6-digit tax rate area numbering system (for the purpose of this map, unincorporated areas are assigned 000 to indicate that the area is not within a city).Boundary ProcessingThese data make a structural change from the source data. While the full boundaries provided by CDTFA include coastal buffers of varying sizes, many users need boundaries to end at the shoreline of the ocean or a bay. As a result, after examining existing city and county boundary layers, these datasets provide a coastline cut generally along the ocean facing coastline. For county boundaries in northern California, the cut runs near the Golden Gate Bridge, while for cities, we cut along the bay shoreline and into the edge of the Delta at the boundaries of Solano, Contra Costa, and Sacramento counties.In the services linked above, the versions that include the coastal buffers contain them as a second (or third) polygon for the city or county, with the value in the COASTAL field set to whether it"s a bay or ocean polygon. These can be processed back into a single polygon by dissolving on all the fields you wish to keep, since the attributes, other than the COASTAL field and geometry attributes (like areas) remain the same between the polygons for this purpose.SliversIn cases where a city or county"s boundary ends near a coastline, our coastline data may cross back and forth many times while roughly paralleling the jurisdiction"s boundary, resulting in many polygon slivers. We post-process the data to remove these slivers using a city/county boundary priority algorithm. That is, when the data run parallel to each other, we discard the coastline cut and keep the CDTFA-provided boundary, even if it extends into the ocean a small amount. This processing supports consistent boundaries for Fort Bragg, Point Arena, San Francisco, Pacifica, Half Moon Bay, and Capitola, in addition to others. More information on this algorithm will be provided soon.Coastline CaveatsSome cities have buffers extending into water bodies that we do not cut at the shoreline. These include South Lake Tahoe and Folsom, which extend into neighboring lakes, and San Diego and surrounding cities that extend into San Diego Bay, which our shoreline encloses. If you have feedback on the exclusion of these items, or others, from the shoreline cuts, please reach out using the contact information above.Offline UseThis service is fully enabled for sync and export using Esri Field Maps or other similar tools. Importantly, the GlobalID field exists only to support that use case and should not be used for any other purpose (see note in field descriptions).Updates and Date of ProcessingConcurrent with CDTFA updates, approximately every two weeks, Last Processed: 12/17/2024 by Nick Santos using code path at https://github.com/CDT-ODS-DevSecOps/cdt-ods-gis-city-county/ at commit 0bf269d24464c14c9cf4f7dea876aa562984db63. It incorporates updates from CDTFA as of 12/12/2024. Future updates will include improvements to metadata and update frequency.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents median household incomes for various household sizes in Moreland Hills, OH, as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau. The dataset highlights the variation in median household income with the size of the family unit, offering valuable insights into economic trends and disparities within different household sizes, aiding in data analysis and decision-making.

Key observations

• Of the 7 household sizes (1 person to 7-or-more person households) reported by the census bureau, Moreland Hills did not include 6, or 7-person households. Across the different household sizes in Moreland Hills the mean income is $193,571, and the standard deviation is $77,440. The coefficient of variation (CV) is 40.01%. This high CV indicates high relative variability, suggesting that the incomes vary significantly across different sizes of households. Please note that the U.S. Census Bureau uses $250,001 as a JAM value to report incomes of $250,000 or more. In the case of Moreland Hills, there were 1 household sizes where the JAM values were used. Thus, the numbers for the mean and standard deviation may not be entirely accurate and have a higher possibility of errors. However, to obtain an approximate estimate, we have used a value of $250,001 as the income for calculations, as reported in the datasets by the U.S. Census Bureau.
• In the most recent year, 2021, The smallest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income was 1-person households, with an income of $69,449. It then further increased to $270,229 for 5-person households, the largest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income.

https://i.neilsberg.com/ch/moreland-hills-oh-median-household-income-by-household-size.jpeg" alt="Moreland Hills, OH median household income, by household size (in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars)">

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Household Sizes:

• 1-person households
• 2-person households
• 3-person households
• 4-person households
• 5-person households
• 6-person households
• 7-or-more-person households

Variables / Data Columns

• Household Size: This column showcases 7 household sizes ranging from 1-person households to 7-or-more-person households (As mentioned above).
• Median Household Income: Median household income, in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars for the specific household size.

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 Moreland Hills median household income. You can refer the same here

For detailed information, visit the Tucson Equity Priority Index StoryMap.Download the Data DictionaryWhat is the Tucson Equity Priority Index (TEPI)?The Tucson Equity Priority Index (TEPI) is a tool that describes the distribution of socially vulnerable demographics. It categorizes the dataset into 5 classes that represent the differing prioritization needs based on the presence of social vulnerability: Low (0-20), Low-Moderate (20-40), Moderate (40-60), Moderate-High (60-80) High (80-100). Each class represents 20% of the dataset’s features in order of their values. The features within the Low (0-20) classification represent the areas that, when compared to all other locations in the study area, have the lowest need for prioritization, as they tend to have less socially vulnerable demographics. The features that fall into the High (80-100) classification represent the 20% of locations in the dataset that have the greatest need for prioritization, as they tend to have the highest proportions of socially vulnerable demographics. How is social vulnerability measured?The Tucson Equity Priority Index (TEPI) examines the proportion of vulnerability per feature using 11 demographic indicators:Income Below Poverty: Households with income at or below the federal poverty level (FPL), which in 2023 was $14,500 for an individual and $30,000 for a family of fourUnemployment: Measured as the percentage of unemployed persons in the civilian labor forceHousing Cost Burdened: Homeowners who spend more than 30% of their income on housing expenses, including mortgage, maintenance, and taxesRenter Cost Burdened: Renters who spend more than 30% of their income on rentNo Health Insurance: Those without private health insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, or any other plan or programNo Vehicle Access: Households without automobile, van, or truck accessHigh School Education or Less: Those highest level of educational attainment is a High School diploma, equivalency, or lessLimited English Ability: Those whose ability to speak English is "Less Than Well."People of Color: Those who identify as anything other than Non-Hispanic White Disability: Households with one or more physical or cognitive disabilities Age: Groups that tend to have higher levels of vulnerability, including children (those below 18), and seniors (those 65 and older)An overall percentile value is calculated for each feature based on the total proportion of the above indicators in each area. How are the variables combined?These indicators are divided into two main categories that we call Thematic Indices: Economic and Personal Characteristics. The two thematic indices are further divided into five sub-indices called Tier-2 Sub-Indices. Each Tier-2 Sub-Index contains 2-3 indicators. Indicators are the datasets used to measure vulnerability within each sub-index. The variables for each feature are re-scaled using the percentile normalization method, which converts them to the same scale using values between 0 to 100. The variables are then combined first into each of the five Tier-2 Sub-Indices, then the Thematic Indices, then the overall TEPI using the mean aggregation method and equal weighting. The resulting dataset is then divided into the five classes, where:High Vulnerability (80-100%): Representing the top classification, this category includes the highest 20% of regions that are the most socially vulnerable. These areas require the most focused attention. Moderate-High Vulnerability (60-80%): This upper-middle classification includes areas with higher levels of vulnerability compared to the median. While not the highest, these areas are more vulnerable than a majority of the dataset and should be considered for targeted interventions. Moderate Vulnerability (40-60%): Representing the middle or median quintile, this category includes areas of average vulnerability. These areas may show a balanced mix of high and low vulnerability. Detailed examination of specific indicators is recommended to understand the nuanced needs of these areas. Low-Moderate Vulnerability (20-40%): Falling into the lower-middle classification, this range includes areas that are less vulnerable than most but may still exhibit certain vulnerable characteristics. These areas typically have a mix of lower and higher indicators, with the lower values predominating. Low Vulnerability (0-20%): This category represents the bottom classification, encompassing the lowest 20% of data points. Areas in this range are the least vulnerable, making them the most resilient compared to all other features in the dataset.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents median household incomes for various household sizes in Edgeworth, PA, as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau. The dataset highlights the variation in median household income with the size of the family unit, offering valuable insights into economic trends and disparities within different household sizes, aiding in data analysis and decision-making.

Key observations

• Of the 7 household sizes (1 person to 7-or-more person households) reported by the census bureau, Edgeworth did not include 7-person households. Across the different household sizes in Edgeworth the mean income is $204,829, and the standard deviation is $77,259. The coefficient of variation (CV) is 37.72%. This high CV indicates high relative variability, suggesting that the incomes vary significantly across different sizes of households. Please note that the U.S. Census Bureau uses $250,001 as a JAM value to report incomes of $250,000 or more. In the case of Edgeworth, there were 4 household sizes where the JAM values were used. Thus, the numbers for the mean and standard deviation may not be entirely accurate and have a higher possibility of errors. However, to obtain an approximate estimate, we have used a value of $250,001 as the income for calculations, as reported in the datasets by the U.S. Census Bureau.
• In the most recent year, 2023, The smallest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income was 1-person households, with an income of $62,721. It then further increased to $250,001 for 6-person households, the largest household size for which the bureau reported a median household income.

Content

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

Household Sizes:

• 1-person households
• 2-person households
• 3-person households
• 4-person households
• 5-person households
• 6-person households
• 7-or-more-person households

Variables / Data Columns

• Household Size: This column showcases 7 household sizes ranging from 1-person households to 7-or-more-person households (As mentioned above).
• Median Household Income: Median household income, in 2023 inflation-adjusted dollars for the specific household size.

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 Edgeworth median household income. You can refer the same here

The Climate Resilience Information System (CRIS) provides data and tools for developers of climate services. This layer has projections of VAR in decadal increments from 1950 to 2100 and for three Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs). The variables included are:Annual number of days with a minimum temperature greater than or equal to 60°F Annual number of days with a minimum temperature greater than or equal to 70°F Annual number of days with a minimum temperature greater than or equal to 75°F Annual number of days with a minimum temperature greater than or equal to 80°F Annual number of days with a minimum temperature greater than or equal to 85°F Annual number of days with a minimum temperature greater than or equal to 90°F This layer uses data from the LOCA2 and STAR-ESDM downscaled climate models for the Contiguous United States. Further processing by the NOAA Technical Support Unit at CICS-NC and Esri are explained below.For each time and SSP, there are minimum, maximum, and mean values for the defined respective geography: counties, tribal areas, HUC-8 watersheds. The process for deriving these summaries is available in Understanding CRIS Data. The combination of time and geography is available for a weighted ensemble of 16 climate projections. More details on the models included in the ensemble and the weighting methodologies can be found in CRIS Data Preparation. Other climate variables are available from the CRIS website’s Data Gallery page or can be accessed in the table below. Additional geographies, including Alaska, Hawai’i and Puerto Rico will be made available in the future.GeographiesThis layer provides projected values for three geographies: county, tribal area, and HUC-8 watersheds.County: based on the U.S. Census TIGER/Line 2022 distribution. Tribal areas: based on the U.S. Census American Indian/Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian Area dataset 2022 distribution. This dataset includes federal- and state-recognized statistical areas.HUC-8 watershed: based on the USGS Washed Boundary Dataset, part of the National Hydrography Database Plus High Resolution. Time RangesProjected climate threshold values (e.g. Days Over 90°F) were calculated for each year from 2005 to 2100. Additionally, values are available for the modeled history runs from 1951 - 2005. The modeled history and future projections have been merged into a single time series and averaged by decade.Climate ScenariosClimate models use future scenarios of greenhouse gas concentrations and human activities to project overall change. These different scenarios are called the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs). Three different SSPs are available here: 2-4.5, 3-7.0, and 5-8.5 (STAR does not have SSP3-7.0). The number before the dash represents a societal behavior scenario. The number after the dash indicates the amount of radiative forcing (watts per meter square) associated with the greenhouse gas concentration scenario in the year 2100 (higher forcing = greater warming). It is unclear which scenario will be the most likely, but SSP 2-4.5 currently aligns with the international targets of the COP-26 agreement. SSP3-7.0 may be the most likely scenario based on current emission trends. SSP5-8.5 acts as a cautionary tale, providing a worst-case scenario if reductions in greenhouse gasses are not undertaken. Data ExportExporting this data into shapefiles, geodatabases, GeoJSON, etc is enabled.