This map shows households that spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing, a threshold widely used by many affordable housing advocates and official government sources including Housing and Urban Development. Census asks about income and housing costs to understand whether housing is affordable in local communities. When housing is not sufficient or not affordable, income data helps communities:

• Enroll eligible households in programs designed to assist them.
• Qualify for grants from the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnership Program, Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG), Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA), and other programs.

The average monthly rent in California for a two-bedroom apartment was 2,464 U.S. dollars in 2024, while a one-bedroom unit cost 1,989 U.S. dollars. Only renters who earn the area median income (AMI) can afford two-bedroom housing in California. Rent affordable to renters with full-time jobs at mean renter wage, or 30 percent area median income, was lower than the fair market rent of a two-bedroom and one-bedroom apartment in California, making this housing in this state not affordable for them. The rent in California ranked highest among all other states in the United States for a two bedroom apartment in 2024.

The housing affordability measure illustrates the relationship between income and housing costs. A household that spends 30% or more of its collective monthly income to cover housing costs is considered to be “housing cost-burden[ed].”[1] Those spending between 30% and 49.9% of their monthly income are categorized as “moderately housing cost-burden[ed],” while those spending more than 50% are categorized as “severely housing cost-burden[ed].”[2]

How much a household spends on housing costs affects the household’s overall financial situation. More money spent on housing leaves less in the household budget for other needs, such as food, clothing, transportation, and medical care, as well as for incidental purchases and saving for the future.

The estimated housing costs as a percentage of household income are categorized by tenure: all households, those that own their housing unit, and those that rent their housing unit.

Throughout the period of analysis, the percentage of housing cost-burdened renter households in Champaign County was higher than the percentage of housing cost-burdened homeowner households in Champaign County. All three categories saw year-to-year fluctuations between 2005 and 2023, and none of the three show a consistent trend. However, all three categories were estimated to have a lower percentage of housing cost-burdened households in 2023 than in 2005.

Data on estimated housing costs as a percentage of monthly income was sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) 1-Year Estimates, which are released annually.

As with any datasets that are estimates rather than exact counts, it is important to take into account the margins of error (listed in the column beside each figure) when drawing conclusions from the data.

Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, instead of providing the standard 1-year data products, the Census Bureau released experimental estimates from the 1-year data in 2020. This includes a limited number of data tables for the nation, states, and the District of Columbia. The Census Bureau states that the 2020 ACS 1-year experimental tables use an experimental estimation methodology and should not be compared with other ACS data. For these reasons, and because data is not available for Champaign County, no data for 2020 is included in this Indicator.

For interested data users, the 2020 ACS 1-Year Experimental data release includes a dataset on Housing Tenure.

[1] Schwarz, M. and E. Watson. (2008). Who can afford to live in a home?: A look at data from the 2006 American Community Survey. U.S. Census Bureau.

[2] Ibid.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2023 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (17 October 2024).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2022 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (22 September 2023).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2021 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (30 September 2022).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2019 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (10 June 2021).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2018 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (10 June 2021).;U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (13 September 2018).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2016 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (14 September 2017).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2015 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (19 September 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2014 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2013 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2012 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2011 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2010 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2008 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; 16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2007 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2006 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2005 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table B25106; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).

Graph and download economic data for Other Financial Information: Estimated Monthly Rental Value of Owned Home by Deciles of Income Before Taxes: Third 10 Percent (21st to 30th Percentile) (CXU910050LB1504M) from 2014 to 2023 about owned, information, percentile, rent, tax, financial, income, housing, estimate, and USA.

The dataset contains current data on low rent and Section 8 units in PHA's administered by HUD. The Section 8 Rental Voucher Program increases affordable housing choices for very low-income households by allowing families to choose privately owned rental housing. Through the Section 8 Rental Voucher Program, the administering housing authority issues a voucher to an income-qualified household, which then finds a unit to rent. If the unit meets the Section 8 quality standards, the PHA then pays the landlord the amount equal to the difference between 30 percent of the tenant's adjusted income (or 10 percent of the gross income or the portion of welfare assistance designated for housing) and the PHA-determined payment standard for the area. The rent must be reasonable compared with similar unassisted units.

Since passage of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937, the federal government has provided housing assistance to low-income renters. Most of these housing subsidies were provided under programs administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) or predecessor agencies. All programs covered in this report provide subsidies that reduce rents for low-income tenants who meet program eligibility requirements. Generally, households pay rent equal to 30 percent of their incomes, after deductions, while the federal government pays the remainder of rent or rental costs. To qualify for a subsidy, an applicant’s income must initially fall below a certain income limit. These income limits are HUD-determined, location specific, and vary by household size. Applicants for housing assistance are usually placed on a waiting list until a subsidized unit becomes available.Assistance provided under HUD programs falls into three categories: public housing, tenant-based, and privately owned, project-based.In public housing, local housing agencies receive allocations of HUD funding to build, operate or make improvements to housing. The housing is owned by the local agencies. Public housing is a form of project-based subsidy because households may receive assistance only if they agree to live at a particular public housing project.Currently, tenant based assistance is the most prevalent form of housing assistance provided. Historically, tenant based assistance began with the Section 8 certificate and voucher programs, which were created in 1974 and 1983, respectively. These programs were replaced by the Housing Choice Voucher program, under legislation enacted in 1998. Tenant based programs allow participants to find and lease housing in the private market. Local public housing agencies (PHAs) and some state agencies serving as PHAs enter into contracts with HUD to administer the programs. The PHAs then enter into contracts with private landlords. The housing must meet housing quality standards and other program requirements. The subsidies are used to supplement the rent paid by low-income households. Under tenant-based programs, assisted households may move and take their subsidy with them. The primary difference between certificates and vouchers is that under certificates, there was a maximum rent which the unit may not exceed. By contrast, vouchers have no specific maximum rent; the low-income household must pay any excess over the payment standard, an amount that is determined locally and that is based on the Fair Market Rent. HUD calculates the Fair Market Rent based on the 40th percentile of the gross rents paid by recent movers for non-luxury units meeting certain quality standards.The third major type of HUD rental assistance is a collection of programs generally referred to as multifamily assisted, or, privately-owned, project-based housing. These types of housing assistance fall under a collection of programs created during the last four decades. What these programs have in common is that they provide rental housing that is owned by private landlords who enter into contracts with HUD in order to receive housing subsidies. The subsidies pay the difference between tenant rent and total rental costs. The subsidy arrangement is termed project-based because the assisted household may not take the subsidy and move to another location. The single largest project-based program was the Section 8 program, which was created in 1974. This program allowed for new construction and substantial rehabilitation that was delivered through a wide variety of financing mechanisms. An important variant of project-based Section 8 was the Loan Management Set Aside (LMSA) program, which was provided in projects financed under Federal Housing Administration (FHA) programs that were not originally intended to provide deep subsidy rental assistance. Projects receiving these LMSA “piggyback” subsidies were developed under the Section 236 program, the Section 221(d)(3) Below Market Interest Rate (BMIR) program, and others that were unassisted when originally developed.Picture of Subsidized Households does not cover other housing

The fair market monthly rent in Florida for a two-bedroom apartment was 1,591 U.S. dollars in 2024. Only renters who earn the area median income (AMI) can afford this housing in Florida. Rent affordable to renters with full-time jobs at mean renter wage or 30 percent area median income was lower than the fair market rent of a two-bedroom apartment and one-bedroom apartment in Florida, making housing in this state not affordable for them. The rent in Florida ranks tenth among all other states in the United States for a two bedroom apartment.

Renters in Spain spent an average of 43 percent of their salary on house rent in 2023. The least affordable autonomous communities to rent a house Madrid and the Balearic Islands, where rental dwellings required roughly 62 percent of the average gross salary. On the other hand, the autonomous region of Extremadura was the least financially demanding, with a share of 23 percent.

Portugal, Canada, and the United States were the countries with the highest house price to income ratio in 2023. In all three countries, the index exceeded 130 index points, while the average for all OECD countries stood at 117.5 index points. The index measures the development of housing affordability and is calculated by dividing nominal house price by nominal disposable income per head, with 2015 set as a base year when the index amounted to 100. An index value of 120, for example, would mean that house price growth has outpaced income growth by 20 percent since 2015. How have house prices worldwide changed since the COVID-19 pandemic? House prices started to rise gradually after the global financial crisis (2007–2008), but this trend accelerated with the pandemic. The countries with advanced economies, which usually have mature housing markets, experienced stronger growth than countries with emerging economies. Real house price growth (accounting for inflation) peaked in 2022 and has since lost some of the gain. Although, many countries experienced a decline in house prices, the global house price index shows that property prices in 2023 were still substantially higher than before COVID-19. Renting vs. buying In the past, house prices have grown faster than rents. However, the home affordability has been declining notably, with a direct impact on rental prices. As people struggle to buy a property of their own, they often turn to rental accommodation. This has resulted in a growing demand for rental apartments and soaring rental prices.

This is a special extract of the 2000 Census 5-Percent Public Use Microdata Samples (PUMS) created by the National Archive of Computerized Data on Aging (NACDA). The file combines the individual 5-percent state files for all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico as released by the United States Census Bureau into a single analysis file. The file contains information on all households that contain at least one person aged 65 years or more in residence as of the 2000 Census enumeration. The file contains individual records on all persons aged 65 and older living in households as well as individual records for all other members residing in each of these households. Consequently, this file can be used to examine both the characteristics of the elderly in the United States as well as the characteristics of individuals who co-reside with persons aged 65 and older as of the year 2000. All household variables from the household-specific "Household record" of the 2000 PUMS are appended to the end of each individual level record. This file is not a special product of the Census Bureau and is not a resample of the PUMS data specific to the elderly population. While it is comparable to the 1990 release CENSUS OF POPULATION AND HOUSING, 1990: [UNITED STATES]: PUBLIC USE MICRODATA SAMPLE: 3-PERCENT ELDERLY SAMPLE (ICPSR 6219), the sampling procedures and weights for the 2000 file reflect the methodology that applies to the 5-percent PUMS release CENSUS OF POPULATION AND HOUSING, 2000 [UNITED STATES]: PUBLIC USE MICRODATA SAMPLE: 5-PERCENT SAMPLE (ICPSR 13568). Person variables cover age, sex, relationship to householder, educational attainment, school enrollment, race, Hispanic origin, ancestry, language spoken at home, citizenship, place of birth, year of immigration, place of residence in 1985, marital status, number of children ever born, military service, mobility and personal care limitation, work limitation status, employment status, occupation, industry, class of worker, hours worked last week, weeks worked in 1989, usual hours worked per week, temporary absence from work, place of work, time of departure for work, travel time to work, means of transportation to work, total earnings, total income, wages and salary income, farm and nonfarm self-employment income, Social Security income, public assistance income, retirement income, and rent, dividends, and net rental income. Housing variables include area type, state and area of residence, farm/nonfarm status, type of structure, year structure was built, vacancy and boarded-up status, number of rooms and bedrooms, presence or absence of a telephone, presence or absence of complete kitchen and plumbing facilities, type of sewage facilities, type of water source, type of heating fuel used, property value, tenure, year moved into house/apartment, type of household/family, type of group quarters, household language, number of persons in the household, number of persons and workers in the family, status of mortgage, second mortgage, and home equity loan, number of vehicles available, household income, sales of agricultural products, payments for rent, mortgage and property tax, condominium fees, mobile home costs, and cost of electricity, water, heating fuel, and flood/fire/hazard insurance.

Hourly wages in the United States are broken into different percentiles to show the hourly earnings of White, Black, and Latino renters in the different percentiles. White workers in all earning percentiles had a higher wage than Black or Latino people. Considering that the housing wages for one- and two-bedroom housing were 26.74 and 32.11 U.S. dollars, respectively, not all earners in the 70th percentile and lower could afford housing. In fact, only white renters in the 50th and 60th could afford a one-bedroom apartment that year. Moreover, while only Black renters in the 70th percentile could afford one-bedroom housing, white renters were able to afford both. However, for a Latino worker making a wage at the 70th percentile, even a one-bedroom unit was not affordable.

These Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) files contain records representing 1-percent samples of the occupied and vacant housing units in the United States and the people in the occupied units in 2000. Group quarters people also are included. The files contain individual weights for each person and housing unit, which when applied to the individual records, expand the sample to the relevant total. Some of the items included on the housing record are: acreage, agricultural sales, bedrooms, condominium fee, contract rent, cost of utilities, family income in 1999, farm residence, fire, hazard, and flood insurance, fuels used, gross rent, heating fuel, household income in 1999, household type, kitchen facilities, linguistic isolation, meals included in rent, mobile home costs, mortgage payment, mortgage status, plumbing facilities, presence and age of own children, presence of subfamilies in household, real estate taxes, rooms, selected monthly owner costs, size of building (units in structure), telephone service, tenure, vacancy status, value (of housing unit), vehicles available, year householder moved into unit, and year structure was built. Some of the items included on the person record are: ability to speak English, age, ancestry, citizenship, class of worker, disability status, earnings in 1999, educational attainment, grandparents as caregivers, Hispanic origin, hours worked, income in 1999 by type, industry, language spoken at home, marital status, means of transportation to work, migration Public Use Microdata Area (PUMA), migration state, mobility status, veteran period of service, years of military service, occupation, personal care limitation, place of birth, place of work PUMA, place of work state, poverty status in 1999, race, relationship, school enrollment and type of school, time of departure for work, travel time to work, vehicle occupancy, weeks worked in 1999, work limitation status, work status in 1999, and year of entry. The Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) files contain geographic units known as super-Public Use Microdata Areas (super-PUMAs) and Public Use Microdata Areas (PUMAs). To maintain the confidentiality of the PUMS data, minimum population thresholds are set for PUMAs and super-PUMAs. For the 1-percent state-level files, the super-PUMAs contain a minimum population of 400,000 and are composed of a PUMA or a group of contiguous PUMAs delineated on the 5-percent state-level PUMS files. Super-PUMAs are a new geographic entity for Census 2000. Super-PUMAs and PUMAs also are defined for place of residence on April 1, 1995, and place of work. (Source: ICPSR, retrieved 06/15/2011)

Panama City, Mexico City, and Guadalajara had the highest average apartment rents in 2022 among the selected Latin American cities. To rent an apartment in a mid-income area in Panama City, renters would have to earn at least 2,250 U.S. dollars per month, assuming that rent comprises not more than 40 percent of the monthly income. Córdoba, Argentina, was the most affordable city, with ideal income needed to rent an apartment amounting to 600 U.S. dollars.

Data from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research (HUD PD&R) and American Community Survey provided by the Urban Institute. This metric reports the share of low-income households at three income levels, low-income (below 80 percent of area median income, or AMI), very low-income (below 50 percent of AMI), and extremely low-income (below 30 percent of AMI), that spend more than half (>50%) of their household income on rent.

This dataset, prepared by the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, comprises 1 percent of the cases in the second release of CENSUS OF POPULATION AND HOUSING, 1990 UNITED STATES: PUBLIC USE MICRODATA SAMPLE: 1-PERCENT SAMPLE (ICPSR 9951). As 1 percent of the 1-Percent Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS), the file constitutes a 1-in-10,000 sample, and contains all housing and population variables in the original 1-Percent PUMS. Housing variables include area type, state and area of residence, farm/nonfarm status, type of structure, year structure was built, vacancy and boarded-up status, number of rooms and bedrooms, presence or absence of a telephone, presence or absence of complete kitchen and plumbing facilities, type of sewage, water source and heating fuel used, property value, tenure, year moved into house/apartment, type of household/family, type of group quarters, language spoken in household, number of persons, related children, own/adopted children, and stepchildren in the household, number of persons and workers in the family, status of mortgage, second mortgage, and home equity loan, number of vehicles available, household income, sales of agricultural products, payments for rent, mortgage, and property tax, condominium fees, mobile home costs, and costs for electricity, water, heating fuel, and flood/fire/hazard insurance. Person variables cover age, sex, and relationship to householder, educational attainment, school enrollment, race, Hispanic origin, ancestry, language spoken at home, citizenship, place of birth, year of immigration, place of residence in 1985, marital status, number of children ever born, presence and age of own children, military service, mobility and personal care limitations, work limitation status, employment status, employment status of parents, occupation, industry, and class of worker, hours worked last week, weeks worked in 1989, usual hours worked per week, temporary absences from work, place of work, time of departure for work, travel time to work, means of transportation to work, number of occupants in vehicle during ride to work, total earnings, total income, wages, and salary income, farm and nonfarm self-employment income, Social Security income, public assistance income, retirement income, and rent, dividend, and net rental income. (Source: downloaded from ICPSR 7/13/10)

Please Note: This dataset is part of the historical CISER Data Archive Collection and is also available at ICPSR at https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06150.v1. We highly recommend using the ICPSR version as they may make this dataset available in multiple data formats in the future.

Renters in the UK spent on average 32.5 percent of their income on rent as of January 2025. Scotland and Yorkshire and Humber were the most affordable regions, with households spending less than 28 percent of their gross income on rent. Conversely, London, South West, and South East had a higher ratio. Greater London is the most expensive region for renters Greater London has a considerably higher rent than the rest of the UK regions. In 2024, the average rental cost in Greater London was more than twice higher than in the North West or West Midlands. Compared with Greater London, rent in the South East region was about 600 British pounds cheaper. London property prices continue to increase In recent years, house prices in the UK have been steadily increasing, and the period after the COVID-19 pandemic has been no exception. Prime residential property prices in Central London are forecast to continue rising until 2027. A similar trend in prime property prices is also expected in Outer London.

This dataset describes information related to the City of Mesa Housing Authority (MHA) which administers the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. The program assists low-income individuals or families living in Mesa with rental assistance according to their income. Information in this dataset is used to calculate the Utilization Rate (the percentage of vouchers that are leased up of the number of allocated vouchers from US Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) to MHA) and the Voucher Budget Authority (the percentage of the allocated funding dollars for rent payments on behalf of current housing voucher participants).

This dataset contains multifamily affordable and market-rate housing sites (typically 5+ units) in the City of Detroit that have been built or rehabbed since 2015, or are currently under construction. Most sites are rental housing, though some are for sale. The data are collected from developers, other government departments and agencies, and proprietary data sources in order to track new multifamily and affordable housing construction and rehabilitation occurring in throughout the city, in service of the City's multifamily affordable housing goals. Data are compiled by various teams within the Housing and Revitalization Department (HRD), led by the Preservation Team. This dataset reflects HRD's current knowledge of multifamily units under construction in the city and will be updated as the department's knowledge changes. For more information about the City's multifamily affordable housing policies and goals, visit here.Affordability level for affordable units are measured by the percentage of the Area Median Income (AMI) that a household could earn for that unit to be considered affordable for them. For example, a unit that rents at a 60% AMI threshold would be affordable to a household earning 60% or less of the median income for the area. Rent affordability is typically defined as housing costs consuming 30% or less of monthly income. Regulated housing programs are designed to serve households based on certain income benchmarks relative to AMI, and these income benchmarks vary based on household size. Detroit city's AMI levels are set by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Metro Fair Market Rent (FMR) area. For more information on AMI in Detroit, visit here.

There is more to housing affordability than the rent or mortgage you pay. Transportation costs are the second-biggest budget item for most families, but it can be difficult for people to fully factor transportation costs into decisions about where to live and work. The Location Affordability Index (LAI) is a user-friendly source of standardized data at the neighborhood (census tract) level on combined housing and transportation costs to help consumers, policymakers, and developers make more informed decisions about where to live, work, and invest. Compare eight household profiles (see table below) —which vary by household income, size, and number of commuters—and see the impact of the built environment on affordability in a given location while holding household demographics constant.*$11,880 for a single person household in 2016 according to US Dept. of Health and Human Services: https://aspe.hhs.gov/computations-2016-poverty-guidelinesThis layer is symbolized by the percentage of housing and transportation costs as a percentage of income for the Median-Income Family profile, but the costs as a percentage of income for all household profiles are listed in the pop-up:Also available is a gallery of 8 web maps (one for each household profile) all symbolized the same way for easy comparison: Median-Income Family, Very Low-Income Individual, Working Individual, Single Professional, Retired Couple, Single-Parent Family, Moderate-Income Family, and Dual-Professional Family.An accompanying story map provides side-by-side comparisons and additional context.--Variables used in HUD's calculations include 24 measures such as people per household, average number of rooms per housing unit, monthly housing costs (mortgage/rent as well as utility and maintenance expenses), average number of cars per household, median commute distance, vehicle miles traveled per year, percent of trips taken on transit, street connectivity and walkability (measured by block density), and many more.To learn more about the Location Affordability Index (v.3) visit: https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/location-affordability-index/. There you will find some background and an FAQ page, which includes the question:"Manhattan, San Francisco, and downtown Boston are some of the most expensive places to live in the country, yet the LAI shows them as affordable for the typical regional household. Why?" These areas have some of the lowest transportation costs in the country, which helps offset the high cost of housing. The area median income (AMI) in these regions is also high, so when costs are shown as a percent of income for the typical regional household these neighborhoods appear affordable; however, they are generally unaffordable to households earning less than the AMI.Date of Coverage: 2012-2016 Date Released: March 2019Date Downloaded from HUD Open Data: 4/18/19Further Documentation:LAI Version 3 Data and MethodologyLAI Version 3 Technical Documentation_**The documentation below is in reference to this items placement in the NM Supply Chain Data Hub. The documentation is of use to understanding the source of this item, and how to reproduce it for updates**

Title: Location Affordability Index - NMCDC Copy

Summary: This layer contains the Location Affordability Index from U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - standardized household, housing, and transportation cost estimates by census tract for 8 household profiles.

Notes: This map is copied from source map: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=de341c1338c5447da400c4e8c51ae1f6, created by dianaclavery_uo, and identified in Living Atlas.

Prepared by: dianaclavery_uo, copied by EMcRae_NMCDC

Source: This map is copied from source map: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=de341c1338c5447da400c4e8c51ae1f6, created by dianaclavery_uo, and identified in Living Atlas. Check the source documentation or other details above for more information about data sources.

Feature Service: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=447a461f048845979f30a2478b9e65bb

UID: 73

Data Requested: Family income spent on basic need

Method of Acquisition: Search for Location Affordability Index in the Living Atlas. Make a copy of most recent map available. To update this map, copy the most recent map available. In a new tab, open the AGOL Assistant Portal tool and use the functions in the portal to copy the new maps JSON, and paste it over the old map (this map with item id

Date Acquired: Map copied on May 10, 2022

Priority rank as Identified in 2022 (scale of 1 being the highest priority, to 11 being the lowest priority): 6

Tags: PENDING

Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, the decennial census is the official source of population totals for April 1st of each decennial year. In between censuses, the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and estimates of housing units for states and counties..Information about the American Community Survey (ACS) can be found on the ACS website. Supporting documentation including code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing, and a full list of ACS tables and table shells (without estimates) can be found on the Technical Documentation section of the ACS website.Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section..Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates.Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted roughly as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables..The 2022 American Community Survey (ACS) data generally reflect the March 2020 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delineations of metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. In certain instances the names, codes, and boundaries of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ from the OMB delineations due to differences in the effective dates of the geographic entities..Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on 2020 Census data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization..Explanation of Symbols:- The estimate could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations. For a ratio of medians estimate, one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution. For a 5-year median estimate, the margin of error associated with a median was larger than the median itself.N The estimate or margin of error cannot be displayed because there were an insufficient number of sample cases in the selected geographic area. (X) The estimate or margin of error is not applicable or not available.median- The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "2,500-")median+ The median falls in the highest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "250,000+").** The margin of error could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations.*** The margin of error could not be computed because the median falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution.***** A margin of error is not appropriate because the corresponding estimate is controlled to an independent population or housing estimate. Effectively, the corresponding estimate has no sampling error and the margin of error may be treated as zero.