Definitions:Urban: Contiguous urban census tracts with a population of 50,000 or greater. Urban census tracts are tracts where at least 10 percent of the tract's land areas is designated as urban by the Census Bureau using the 2020 urbanized area criteria.Rural Center: Contiguous urban census tracts with a population of less than 50,000. Urban census tracts are tracts where at least 10 percent of the tract's land area is designated as urban by the Census Bureau using the 2020 urbanized area criteria.Rural: Census tracts where less than 10 percent of the tract's land area is designated as urban by the Census Bureau using the 2020 urbanized area criteria.Disadvantaged Community (DAC): Census tracts that score within the top 25th percentile of the Office of Environmental Health Hazards Assessment’s California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen) 4.0 scores, as well as areas of high pollution and low population, such as ports.Low-income Community (LIC): Census tracts with median household incomes at or below 80 percent of the statewide median income or with median household incomes at or below the threshold designated as low income by the Department of Housing and Community Development’s list of state income limits adopted pursuant to Section 50093 of the California Health and Safety Code.Middle-income Community (MIC): Census tracts with median household incomes between 80 to 120 percent of the statewide median income, or with median household incomes between the threshold designated as low- and moderate-income by the Department of Housing and Community Development’s list of state income limits adopted pursuant to section 50093 of the California Health and Safety Code. High-income Community (HIC): Census tracts with median household income at or above 120 percent of the statewide median income or with median household incomes at or above the threshold designated as moderate-income by the Department of Housing and Community Development’s list of state income limits adopted pursuant to section 50093 of the California Health and Safety Code.Data Dictionary:ObjectID1_: Unique IDShape: Geometric form of the featureSTATEFP: State FIPS CodeCOUNTYFP: County FIPS CodeCOUNTY: County NameTract: Census Tract IDPopulation_2019_5YR: Population from the American Community Survey 2019 5-Year EstimatesPop_dens: Census tract designation as Urban, Rural Center, or RuralDAC: Census tract designation as Disadvantaged or not (DAC or Not DAC)Income_Group: Census tract designation as Low-, Middle-, or High-income Community (LIC, MIC, or HIC)Priority_pop: Census tract designation as Low-income and/or Disadvantaged or not (LIC and/or DAC, or Not LIC and/or DAC)Shape_Length: Census tract shape area (square meters)Shape_Area: Census tract shape length (square meters)Data sources:Urban, rural center, and rural designations are from the 2025 Senate Bill (SB) 1000 AssessmentDisadvantaged community designations are from the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) under Senate Bill (SB) 535Low-income community designations are from the California Air Resources Board under Assembly Bill (AB) 1550. Middle- and high-income designations are from the SB 1000 Assessments.

Urban Displacement Project’s (UDP) Estimated Displacement Risk (EDR) model for California identifies varying levels of displacement risk for low-income renter households in all census tracts in the state from 2015 to 2019(1). The model uses machine learning to determine which variables are most strongly related to displacement at the household level and to predict tract-level displacement risk statewide while controlling for region. UDP defines displacement risk as a census tract with characteristics which, according to the model, are strongly correlated with more low-income population loss than gain. In other words, the model estimates that more low-income households are leaving these neighborhoods than moving in.This map is a conservative estimate of low-income loss and should be considered a tool to help identify housing vulnerability. Displacement may occur because of either investment, disinvestment, or disaster-driven forces. Because this risk assessment does not identify the causes of displacement, UDP does not recommend that the tool be used to assess vulnerability to investment such as new housing construction or infrastructure improvements. HCD recommends combining this map with on-the-ground accounts of displacement, as well as other related data such as overcrowding, cost burden, and income diversity to achieve a full understanding of displacement risk.If you see a tract or area that does not seem right, please fill out this form to help UDP ground-truth the method and improve their model.How should I read the displacement map layers?The AFFH Data Viewer includes three separate displacement layers that were generated by the EDR model. The “50-80% AMI” layer shows the level of displacement risk for low-income (LI) households specifically. Since UDP has reason to believe that the data may not accurately capture extremely low-income (ELI) households due to the difficulty in counting this population, UDP combined ELI and very low-income (VLI) household predictions into one group—the “0-50% AMI” layer—by opting for the more “extreme” displacement scenario (e.g., if a tract was categorized as “Elevated” for VLI households but “Extreme” for ELI households, UDP assigned the tract to the “Extreme” category for the 0-50% layer). For these two layers, tracts are assigned to one of the following categories, with darker red colors representing higher displacement risk and lighter orange colors representing less risk:• Low Data Quality: the tract has less than 500 total households and/or the census margins of error were greater than 15% of the estimate (shaded gray).• Lower Displacement Risk: the model estimates that the loss of low-income households is less than the gain in low-income households. However, some of these areas may have small pockets of displacement within their boundaries. • At Risk of Displacement: the model estimates there is potential displacement or risk of displacement of the given population in these tracts.• Elevated Displacement: the model estimates there is a small amount of displacement (e.g., 10%) of the given population.• High Displacement: the model estimates there is a relatively high amount of displacement (e.g., 20%) of the given population.• Extreme Displacement: the model estimates there is an extreme level of displacement (e.g., greater than 20%) of the given population. The “Overall Displacement” layer shows the number of income groups experiencing any displacement risk. For example, in the dark red tracts (“2 income groups”), the model estimates displacement (Elevated, High, or Extreme) for both of the two income groups. In the light orange tracts categorized as “At Risk of Displacement”, one or all three income groups had to have been categorized as “At Risk of Displacement”. Light yellow tracts in the “Overall Displacement” layer are not experiencing UDP’s definition of displacement according to the model. Some of these yellow tracts may be majority low-income experiencing small to significant growth in this population while in other cases they may be high-income and exclusive (and therefore have few low-income residents to begin with). One major limitation to the model is that the migration data UDP uses likely does not capture some vulnerable populations, such as undocumented households. This means that some yellow tracts may be experiencing high rates of displacement among these types of households. MethodologyThe EDR is a first-of-its-kind model that uses machine learning and household level data to predict displacement. To create the EDR, UDP first joined household-level data from Data Axle (formerly Infogroup) with tract-level data from the 2014 and 2019 5-year American Community Survey; Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) data from various sources compiled by California Housing and Community Development; Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) Origin-Destination Employment Statistics (LODES) data; and the Environmental Protection Agency’s Smart Location Database.UDP then used a machine learning model to determine which variables are most strongly related to displacement at the household level and to predict tract-level displacement risk statewide while controlling for region. UDP modeled displacement risk as the net migration rate of three separate renter households income categories: extremely low-income (ELI), very low-income (VLI), and low-income (LI). These households have incomes between 0-30% of the Area Median Income (AMI), 30-50% AMI, and 50-80% AMI, respectively. Tracts that have a predicted net loss within these groups are considered to experience displacement in three degrees: elevated, high, and extreme. UDP also includes a “At Risk of Displacement” category in tracts that might be experiencing displacement.What are the main limitations of this map?1. Because the map uses 2019 data, it does not reflect more recent trends. The pandemic, which started in 2020, has exacerbated income inequality and increased housing costs, meaning that UDP’s map likely underestimates current displacement risk throughout the state.2. The model examines displacement risk for renters only, and does not account for the fact that many homeowners are also facing housing and gentrification pressures. As a result, the map generally only highlights areas with relatively high renter populations, and neighborhoods with higher homeownership rates that are known to be experiencing gentrification and displacement are not as prominent as one might expect.3. The model does not incorporate data on new housing construction or infrastructure projects. The map therefore does not capture the potential impacts of these developments on displacement risk; it only accounts for other characteristics such as demographics and some features of the built environment. Two of UDP’s other studies—on new housing construction and green infrastructure—explore the relationships between these factors and displacement.Variable ImportanceFigures 1, 2, and 3 show the most important variables for each of the three models—ELI, VLI, and LI. The horizontal bars show the importance of each variable in predicting displacement for the respective group. All three models share a similar order of variable importance with median rent, percent non-white, rent gap (i.e., rental market pressure calculated using the difference between nearby and local rents), percent renters, percent high-income households, and percent of low-income households driving much of the displacement estimation. Other important variables include building types as well as economic and socio-demographic characteristics. For a full list of the variables included in the final models, ranked by descending order of importance, and their definitions see all three tabs of this spreadsheet. “Importance” is defined in two ways: 1. % Inclusion: The average proportion of times this variable was included in the model’s decision tree as the most important or driving factor.2. MeanRank: The average rank of importance for each variable across the numerous model runs where higher numbers mean higher ranking. Figures 1 through 3 below show each of the model variable rankings ordered by importance. The red lines represent Jenks Breaks, which are designed to sort values into their most “natural” clusters. Variable importance for each model shows a substantial drop-off after about 10 variables, meaning a relatively small number of variables account for a large amount of the predictive power in UDP’s displacement model.Figure 1. Variable Importance for Low Income HouseholdsFor a description of each variable and its source, see this spreadsheet.Figure 2. Variable Importance for Very Low Income HouseholdsFor a description of each variable and its source, see this spreadsheet. Figure 3. Variable Importance for Extremely Low Income HouseholdsFor a description of each variable and its source, see this spreadsheet.Source: Chapple, K., & Thomas, T., and Zuk, M. (2022). Urban Displacement Project website. Berkeley, CA: Urban Displacement Project.(1) UDP used this time-frame because (a) the 2020 census had a large non-response rate and it implemented a new statistical modification that obscures and misrepresents racial and economic characteristics at the census tract level and (b) pandemic mobility trends are still in flux and UDP believes 2019 is more representative of “normal” or non-pandemic displacement trends.

Statistics Canada's 2021 Census data, by community and age group, on the number and proportion of people whose income is below the low-income line. Keywords: Low-income, LICO-AT Statistics Canada. 2022. Census Profile. 2021 Census of Population. Statistics Canada Catalogue number 98-316-X2021001. Ottawa. Released October 26, 2022. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm

Low income cut-offs (LICOs) before and after tax by community size and family size, in current dollars, annual.

Low income measure (LIM) thresholds by household size for market income, total income and after-tax income, in current and constant dollars, annual.

Census tracts are designated as urban, rural center, or rural through SB 1000 analysis. These designations are being used for the REV 2.0 and Community Charging in Urban Areas GFOs. Rural centers are contiguous urban census tracts with a population of less than 50,0000. Urban census tracts are tracts where at least 10 percent of the tract’s land area is designated as urban by the Census Bureau using the 2020 urbanized area criteria. Rural communities are census tracts where less than 10 percent of the tract’s land area is designated as urban by the Census Bureau using the 2020 urbanized area criteria. Urban communities are contiguous urban census tracts with a population of 50,000 or greater. Urban census tracts are tracts where at least 10 percent of the tract’s land area is designated as urban by the Census Bureau using the 2020 urbanized area criteria.Data Dictionary:OBJECTID: Unique IDSTATEFP: State FIPS CodeCOUNTYFP: County FIPS CodeTRACTCE: Census Tract IDGEOID: Geographic IdentifierName: Census Tract ID Name (short)NAMELSAD: Census Tract ID Name (long)ALAND: Land Area (square meters)AWATER: Water Area (square meters)DAC: Whether or not a census tract is a disadvantaged community as defined by SB 535 and designated by CalEPA using CalEnviroScreen 4.0 (May 2022 update)Income_Group: Whether or not a census tract is low-, middle-, or high-income as defined by AB 1550 and designated by CARB and the CEC (June 2023 update)Urban_Rural_RuralCenter: Whether or not a census tract is urban, rural, or rural center as defined and designated by the CEC through the SB 1000 Assessment (2024 update)PerCap_100k_L2DCFC: Number of public Level 2 and DC fast chargers per 100,000 people in a census tractDAC_andor_LIC: Whether or not a census tract is a disadvantaged or low-income community as defined by SB 535 and AB 1550 and designated by CalEPA and CARBUCC_eligible: Whether or not the census tract is an eligible area for the Community Charging in Urban Areas GFO. For a site to be eligible, it must be in a census tract that is either a disadvantaged or low-income community, and urban, and has below the state average for per capita public Level 2 and DC fast chargers as defined by the CEC.REV2_eligible: Whether or not the census tract is an eligible area for the Rural Electric Vehicle Charging 2.0 GFO. For a site to be eligible, it must be in a rural or rural center census tract as defined by the CEC.Shape_Area: Census tract shape area (square meters)Shape_Length: Census tract shape length (square meters)

Individual low-income status by low-income measure (before and after tax), age, and gender.

In 2022, San Francisco had the highest median household income of cities ranking within the top 25 in terms of population, with a median household income in of 136,692 U.S. dollars. In that year, San Jose in California was ranked second, and Seattle, Washington third.

Following a fall after the great recession, median household income in the United States has been increasing in recent years. As of 2022, median household income by state was highest in Maryland, Washington, D.C., Utah, and Massachusetts. It was lowest in Mississippi, West Virginia, and Arkansas. Families with an annual income of 25,000 and 49,999 U.S. dollars made up the largest income bracket in America, with about 25.26 million households.

Data on median household income can be compared to statistics on personal income in the U.S. released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Personal income rose to around 21.8 trillion U.S. dollars in 2022, the highest value recorded. Personal income is a measure of the total income received by persons from all sources, while median household income is “the amount with divides the income distribution into two equal groups,” according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Half of the population in question lives above median income and half lives below. Though total personal income has increased in recent years, this wealth is not distributed throughout the population. In practical terms, income of most households has decreased. One additional statistic illustrates this disparity: for the lowest quintile of workers, mean household income has remained more or less steady for the past decade at about 13 to 16 thousand constant U.S. dollars annually. Meanwhile, income for the top five percent of workers has actually risen from about 285,000 U.S. dollars in 1990 to about 499,900 U.S. dollars in 2020.

This spatial data set contains Statistics Canada 2021 Census information for Low Income and Income Inequality in 2020 by census tract. For more information please visit the Statistics Canada Census Dictionary: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/ref/dict/index-eng.cfmIt is recommended to use the Field Dictionary in conjunction with this data: Click Here

Priority Equity Communities are census tracts in the SCAG region that have a greater concentration of populations that have been historically marginalized and are susceptible to inequitable outcomes based on several socioeconomic factors. The socioeconomic factors, or priority populations, were selected based on statutorily protected populations and refined with input gathered through outreach processes. The US Census Bureau 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year estimates are used to define each of the thresholds for the priority populations. SCAG’s 2022 High Quality Transit Corridors are used in the Limited Vehicle and Transit Access criteria. This dataset uses 2020 census tracts in the SCAG region. A census tract is considered a Priority Equity Community if there is a concentration above the county average of:• BOTH low-income households and people of color; OR• EITHER low-income households or people of color AND of four or more of the following:• Vulnerable Ages • People with Disabilities• People with Limited English Proficiency• Limited Vehicle and Transit Access • People without a High School Diploma• Single Parent Households• Housing Cost Burdened HouseholdsSCAG prepared the dataset by calculating county-level averages for each criterion and removing census tracts that did not meet the criteria. For more details on the methodology or to request the detailed dataset, please contact environmentaljustice@scag.ca.gov.

Estimate of Median Household Income for Tehama County, CA was 58333.00000 $ in January of 2023, according to the United States Federal Reserve. Historically, Estimate of Median Household Income for Tehama County, CA reached a record high of 61571.00000 in January of 2020 and a record low of 21236.00000 in January of 1989. Trading Economics provides the current actual value, an historical data chart and related indicators for Estimate of Median Household Income for Tehama County, CA - last updated from the United States Federal Reserve on August of 2025.

Number of persons in low income, low income rate and average gap ratio by age, sex and economic family type, annual.

This table contains data on the living wage and the percent of families with incomes below the living wage for California, its counties, regions and cities/towns. Living wage is the wage needed to cover basic family expenses (basic needs budget) plus all relevant taxes; it does not include publicly provided income or housing assistance. The percent of families below the living wage was calculated using data from the Living Wage Calculator and the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. The table is part of a series of indicators in the Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project of the Office of Health Equity. The living wage is the wage or annual income that covers the cost of the bare necessities of life for a worker and his/her family. These necessities include housing, transportation, food, childcare, health care, and payment of taxes. Low income populations and non-white race/ethnic have disproportionately lower wages, poorer housing, and higher levels of food insecurity. More information about the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the About/Attachments section.

Income Inequality in Placer County, CA was 14.11221 Ratio in January of 2023, according to the United States Federal Reserve. Historically, Income Inequality in Placer County, CA reached a record high of 14.29958 in January of 2020 and a record low of 11.37774 in January of 2010. Trading Economics provides the current actual value, an historical data chart and related indicators for Income Inequality in Placer County, CA - last updated from the United States Federal Reserve on July of 2025.

Housing Assessment Resource Tools (HART) This dataset contains 2 tables and 5 files which draw upon data from the 2021 Census of Canada. The tables are a custom order and contain data pertaining to older adults and housing need. The 2 tables have 6 dimensions in common and 1 dimension that is unique to each table. Table 1's unique dimension is the "Ethnicity / Indigeneity status" dimension which contains data fields related to visible minority and Indigenous identity within the population in private households. Table 2's unique dimension is "Structural type of dwelling and Period of Construction" which contains data fields relating to the structural type and period of construction of the dwelling. Each of the two tables is then split into multiple files based on geography. Table 1 has two files: Table 1.1 includes Canada, Provinces and Territories (14 geographies), CDs of NWT (6), CDs of Yukon (1) and CDs of Nunavut (3); and Table 1.2 includes Canada and the CMAs of Canada (44). Table 2 has three files: Table 2.1 includes Canada, Provinces and Territories (14), CDs of NWT (6), CDs of Yukon (1) and CDs of Nunavut (3); Table 2.2 includes Canada and the CMAs of Canada excluding Ontario and Quebec (20 geographies); and Table 2.3 includes Canada and the CMAs of Canada that are in Ontario and Quebec (25 geographies). The dataset is in Beyond 20/20 (.ivt) format. The Beyond 20/20 browser is required in order to open it. This software can be freely downloaded from the Statistics Canada website: https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/public/beyond20-20 (Windows only). For information on how to use Beyond 20/20, please see: http://odesi2.scholarsportal.info/documentation/Beyond2020/beyond20-quickstart.pdf https://wiki.ubc.ca/Library:Beyond_20/20_Guide Custom order from Statistics Canada includes the following dimensions and data fields: Geography: - Country of Canada as a whole - All 10 Provinces (Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island (PEI), Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia) as a whole - All 3 Territories (Nunavut, Northwest Territories, Yukon), as a whole as well as all census divisions (CDs) within the 3 territories - All 43 census metropolitan areas (CMAs) in Canada Data Quality and Suppression: - The global non-response rate (GNR) is an important measure of census data quality. It combines total non-response (households) and partial non-response (questions). A lower GNR indicates a lower risk of non-response bias and, as a result, a lower risk of inaccuracy. The counts and estimates for geographic areas with a GNR equal to or greater than 50% are not published in the standard products. The counts and estimates for these areas have a high risk of non-response bias, and in most cases, should not be released. - Area suppression is used to replace all income characteristic data with an 'x' for geographic areas with populations and/or number of households below a specific threshold. If a tabulation contains quantitative income data (e.g., total income, wages), qualitative data based on income concepts (e.g., low income before tax status) or derived data based on quantitative income variables (e.g., indexes) for individuals, families or households, then the following rule applies: income characteristic data are replaced with an 'x' for areas where the population is less than 250 or where the number of private households is less than 40. Source: Statistics Canada - When showing count data, Statistics Canada employs random rounding in order to reduce the possibility of identifying individuals within the tabulations. Random rounding transforms all raw counts to random rounded counts. Reducing the possibility of identifying individuals within the tabulations becomes pertinent for very small (sub)populations. All counts are rounded to a base of 5, meaning they will end in either 0 or 5. The random rounding algorithm controls the results and rounds the unit value of the count according to a predetermined frequency. Counts ending in 0 or 5 are not changed. Universe: Full Universe: Population aged 55 years and over in owner and tenant households with household total income greater than zero in non-reserve non-farm private dwellings. Definition of Households examined for Core Housing Need: Private, non-farm, non-reserve, owner- or renter-households with incomes greater than zero and shelter-cost-to-income ratios less than 100% are assessed for 'Core Housing Need.' Non-family Households with at least one household maintainer aged 15 to 29 attending school are considered not to be in Core Housing Need, regardless of their housing circumstances. Data Fields: Table 1: Age / Gender (12) 1. Total – Population 55 years and over 2. Men+ 3. Women+ 4. 55 to 64 years 5. Men+ 6. Women+ 7. 65+ years 8. Men+ 9. Women+ 10. 85+ 11. Men+ 12. Women+ Housing indicators (13) 1. Total – Private Households by core housing need status 2. Households below one standard only...

In February 2017, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and theCalifornia Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) convened a group of independentorganizations and research centers that would become the California Fair Housing Task Force(“Task Force”). TCAC and HCD charged the Task Force with creating an opportunity map to identify areas inevery region of the state whose characteristics have been shown by research to support positiveeconomic, educational, and health outcomes for low-income families—particularly long-termoutcomes for children. This dataset is from the TCAC opportunity areas mapping analysis of 2020. Orginal data sourced from: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity/2020.asp

Income Inequality in Lassen County, CA was 12.10972 Ratio in January of 2023, according to the United States Federal Reserve. Historically, Income Inequality in Lassen County, CA reached a record high of 13.07866 in January of 2017 and a record low of 10.11028 in January of 2020. Trading Economics provides the current actual value, an historical data chart and related indicators for Income Inequality in Lassen County, CA - last updated from the United States Federal Reserve on July of 2025.

Japan BoP: CA: Primary Income data was reported at 3,881.730 JPY bn in Feb 2025. This records an increase from the previous number of 3,611.068 JPY bn for Jan 2025. Japan BoP: CA: Primary Income data is updated monthly, averaging 1,185.085 JPY bn from Jan 1996 (Median) to Feb 2025, with 350 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 4,859.580 JPY bn in Aug 2024 and a record low of 301.099 JPY bn in Jun 2020. Japan BoP: CA: Primary Income data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bank of Japan. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Japan – Table JP.JB001: Balance of Payment: BPM6: Summary.

Income Inequality in Butte County, CA was 17.69348 Ratio in January of 2023, according to the United States Federal Reserve. Historically, Income Inequality in Butte County, CA reached a record high of 18.04221 in January of 2020 and a record low of 13.10266 in January of 2010. Trading Economics provides the current actual value, an historical data chart and related indicators for Income Inequality in Butte County, CA - last updated from the United States Federal Reserve on July of 2025.

Note: Data on gender diverse households (formerly "2SLGBTQ+" households) has been added as of March 28th, 2025. For more information, please visit HART.ubc.ca. Housing Assessment Resource Tools (HART) This dataset contains 18 tables which draw upon data from the 2021 Canadian Census of Population. The tables are a custom order and contain data pertaining to core housing need and characteristics of households and dwellings. This custom order was placed in collaboration with Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Canada to fill data gaps in their Housing Needs Assessment Template. 17 of the tables each cover a different geography in Canada: one for Canada as a whole, one for all Canadian census divisions (CD), and 15 for all census subdivisions (CSD) across Canada. The 18th table contains the median income for all geographies. Statistics Canada used these median incomes as the "area median household income (AMHI)," from which they derived some of the data fields within the Shelter Costs/Household Income dimension. The dataset is in Beyond 20/20 (.ivt) format. The Beyond 20/20 browser is required in order to open it. This software can be freely downloaded from the Statistics Canada website: https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/public/beyond20-20 (Windows only). For information on how to use Beyond 20/20, please see: http://odesi2.scholarsportal.info/documentation/Beyond2020/beyond20-quickstart.pdf https://wiki.ubc.ca/Library:Beyond_20/20_Guide Custom order from Statistics Canada includes the following dimensions and data fields: Geography: - Country of Canada, all CDs & Country as a whole - All 10 Provinces (Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island (PEI), Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia), all CSDs & each Province as a whole - All 3 Territories (Nunavut, Northwest Territories, Yukon), all CSDs & each Territory as a whole *- Data on gender diverse households is only available for geographies (provinces, territories, CDs, CSDs) with a population count greater than 50,000. Data Quality and Suppression: - The global non-response rate (GNR) is an important measure of census data quality. It combines total non-response (households) and partial non-response (questions). A lower GNR indicates a lower risk of non-response bias and, as a result, a lower risk of inaccuracy. The counts and estimates for geographic areas with a GNR equal to or greater than 50% are not published in the standard products. The counts and estimates for these areas have a high risk of non-response bias, and in most cases, should not be released. - Area suppression is used to replace all income characteristic data with an 'x' for geographic areas with populations and/or number of households below a specific threshold. If a tabulation contains quantitative income data (e.g., total income, wages), qualitative data based on income concepts (e.g., low income before tax status) or derived data based on quantitative income variables (e.g., indexes) for individuals, families or households, then the following rule applies: income characteristic data are replaced with an 'x' for areas where the population is less than 250 or where the number of private households is less than 40. Source: Statistics Canada - When showing count data, Statistics Canada employs random rounding in order to reduce the possibility of identifying individuals within the tabulations. Random rounding transforms all raw counts to random rounded counts. Reducing the possibility of identifying individuals within the tabulations becomes pertinent for very small (sub)populations. All counts greater than 10 are rounded to a base of 5, meaning they will end in either 0 or 5. The random rounding algorithm controls the results and rounds the unit value of the count according to a predetermined frequency. Counts ending in 0 or 5 are not changed. Counts less than 10 are rounded to a base of 10, meaning they will be rounded to either 10 or Zero. Universe: Private Households in Non-farm Non-band Off-reserve Occupied Private Dwellings with Income Greater than zero. Households examined for Core Housing Need: Private, non-farm, non-reserve, owner- or renter-households with incomes greater than zero and shelter-cost-to-income ratios less than 100% are assessed for 'Core Housing Need.' Non-family Households with at least one household maintainer aged 15 to 29 attending school are considered not to be in Core Housing Need, regardless of their housing circumstances. Data Fields: Tenure Including Presence of Mortgage and Subsidized Housing; Household size (7) 1. Total - Private households by tenure including presence of mortgage payments and subsidized housing 2. Owner 3. With mortgage 4. Without mortgage 5. Renter 6. Subsidized housing 7. Not subsidized housing Housing indicators in Core Housing Universe (12) 1. Total - Private Households by core housing need status 2. Households examined for core housing need 3. Households in core...