West Virginia and Kansas had the lowest cost of living across all U.S. states, with composite costs being half of those found in Hawaii. This was according to a composite index that compares prices for various goods and services on a state-by-state basis. In West Virginia, the cost of living index amounted to **** — well below the national benchmark of 100. Virginia— which had an index value of ***** — was only slightly above that benchmark. Expensive places to live included Hawaii, Massachusetts, and California. Housing costs in the U.S. Housing is usually the highest expense in a household’s budget. In 2023, the average house sold for approximately ******* U.S. dollars, but house prices in the Northeast and West regions were significantly higher. Conversely, the South had some of the least expensive housing. In West Virginia, Mississippi, and Louisiana, the median price of the typical single-family home was less than ******* U.S. dollars. That makes living expenses in these states significantly lower than in states such as Hawaii and California, where housing is much pricier. What other expenses affect the cost of living? Utility costs such as electricity, natural gas, water, and internet also influence the cost of living. In Alaska, Hawaii, and Connecticut, the average monthly utility cost exceeded *** U.S. dollars. That was because of the significantly higher prices for electricity and natural gas in these states.

This statistic shows the best states to make living in the United States in 2019. In 2019, Wyoming was ranked as the best state to make a living in the United States, with the cost of living index at **** value and the median income of ****** U.S. dollars.

This statistic shows the most affordable metro areas in the Unites States in 2017, by share of income spent on living expenses. In 2017, Omaha was the second most affordable metro area because ***** percent of the median blending annual household income was spent on the average cost of owning or renting a home as well the average cost of utilities and taxes.

The US Family Budget Dataset provides insights into the cost of living in different US counties based on the Family Budget Calculator by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI).

This dataset offers community-specific estimates for ten family types, including one or two adults with zero to four children, in all 1877 counties and metro areas across the United States.

Interesting Task Ideas:

1. See how family budgets compare to the federal poverty line and the Supplemental Poverty Measure in different counties.
2. Look into the money challenges faced by different types of families using the budgets provided.
3. Find out which counties have the most affordable places to live, food, transportation, healthcare, childcare, and other things people need.
4. Explore how the average income of families relates to the overall cost of living in different counties.
5. Investigate how family size affects the estimated budget and find counties where bigger families have higher costs.
6. Create visuals showing how the cost of living varies across different states and big cities.
7. Check whether specific counties are affordable for families of different sizes and types.
8. Use the dataset to compare living standards and economic security in different US counties.

If you find this dataset valuable, don't forget to hit the upvote button! 😊💝

Checkout my other datasets

Employment-to-Population Ratio for USA

Productivity and Hourly Compensation

130K Kindle Books

900K TMDb Movies

USA Unemployment Rates by Demographics & Race

Photo by Alev Takil on Unsplash

In 2024, the annual cost for a private room in an assisted living facility in the U.S. amounted to 70,800 U.S. dollars - the national median price. However, cost varied greatly from one state to another. The least expensive states for a private room in assisted living were South Dakota, and Mississippi. While the most expensive states for assisted living were Hawaii and Alaska.

In the United States, Hawaii was the state with the most expensive housing, with the typical value of single-family homes in the 35th to 65th percentile range exceeding ******* U.S. dollars. Unsurprisingly, Hawaii also ranked top as the state with the highest cost of living. Meanwhile, a property was the least expensive in West Virginia, where it cost under ******* U.S. dollars to buy the typical single-family home. Single-family home prices increased across most states in the United States between December 2023 and December 2024, except in Louisiana, Florida, and the District of Colombia. According to the Federal Housing Association, house appreciation in 13 states exceeded **** percent in 2023.

This table contains data on the percent of households paying more than 30% (or 50%) of monthly household income towards housing costs for California, its regions, counties, cities/towns, and census tracts. Data is from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Consolidated Planning Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) and the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS). The table is part of a series of indicators in the [Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project of the Office of Health Equity] Affordable, quality housing is central to health, conferring protection from the environment and supporting family life. Housing costs—typically the largest, single expense in a family's budget—also impact decisions that affect health. As housing consumes larger proportions of household income, families have less income for nutrition, health care, transportation, education, etc. Severe cost burdens may induce poverty—which is associated with developmental and behavioral problems in children and accelerated cognitive and physical decline in adults. Low-income families and minority communities are disproportionately affected by the lack of affordable, quality housing. More information about the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the Attachments.

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Poverty (EQ5)

FULL MEASURE NAME The share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit

LAST UPDATED December 2018

DESCRIPTION Poverty refers to the share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit, which varies based on the number of individuals in a given household. It reflects the number of individuals who are economically struggling due to low household income levels.

DATA SOURCE U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census http://www.nhgis.org (1980-1990) http://factfinder2.census.gov (2000)

U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey Form C17002 (2006-2017) http://api.census.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) The U.S. Census Bureau defines a national poverty level (or household income) that varies by household size, number of children in a household, and age of householder. The national poverty level does not vary geographically even though cost of living is different across the United States. For the Bay Area, where cost of living is high and incomes are correspondingly high, an appropriate poverty level is 200% of poverty or twice the national poverty level, consistent with what was used for past equity work at MTC and ABAG. For comparison, however, both the national and 200% poverty levels are presented.

For Vital Signs, the poverty rate is defined as the number of people (including children) living below twice the poverty level divided by the number of people for whom poverty status is determined. Poverty rates do not include unrelated individuals below 15 years old or people who live in the following: institutionalized group quarters, college dormitories, military barracks, and situations without conventional housing. The household income definitions for poverty change each year to reflect inflation. The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps). For the national poverty level definitions by year, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/threshld/index.html For an explanation on how the Census Bureau measures poverty, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/measure.html

For the American Community Survey datasets, 1-year data was used for region, county, and metro areas whereas 5-year rolling average data was used for city and census tract.

To be consistent across metropolitan areas, the poverty definition for non-Bay Area metros is twice the national poverty level. Data were not adjusted for varying income and cost of living levels across the metropolitan areas.

VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR
Poverty (EQ5)

FULL MEASURE NAME
The share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit

LAST UPDATED
January 2023

DESCRIPTION
Poverty refers to the share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit, which varies based on the number of individuals in a given household. It reflects the number of individuals who are economically struggling due to low household income levels.

DATA SOURCE
U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census - http://www.nhgis.org
1980-2000

U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey - https://data.census.gov/
2007-2021
Form C17002

CONTACT INFORMATION
vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov

METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator)
The U.S. Census Bureau defines a national poverty level (or household income) that varies by household size, number of children in a household, and age of householder. The national poverty level does not vary geographically even though cost of living is different across the United States. For the Bay Area, where cost of living is high and incomes are correspondingly high, an appropriate poverty level is 200% of poverty or twice the national poverty level, consistent with what was used for past equity work at MTC and ABAG. For comparison, however, both the national and 200% poverty levels are presented.

For Vital Signs, the poverty rate is defined as the number of people (including children) living below twice the poverty level divided by the number of people for whom poverty status is determined. The household income definitions for poverty change each year to reflect inflation. The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or non-cash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid and food stamps).

For the national poverty level definitions by year, see: US Census Bureau Poverty Thresholds - https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/historical-poverty-thresholds.html.

For an explanation on how the Census Bureau measures poverty, see: How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty - https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty/guidance/poverty-measures.html.

American Community Survey (ACS) 1-year data is used for larger geographies – Bay counties and most metropolitan area counties – while smaller geographies rely upon 5-year rolling average data due to their smaller sample sizes. Note that 2020 data uses the 5-year estimates because the ACS did not collect 1-year data for 2020.

To be consistent across metropolitan areas, the poverty definition for non-Bay Area metros is twice the national poverty level. Data were not adjusted for varying income and cost of living levels across the metropolitan areas.

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).

Of the most populous cities in the U.S., San Jose, California had the highest annual income requirement at ******* U.S. dollars annually for homeowners to have an affordable and comfortable life in 2024. This can be compared to Houston, Texas, where homeowners needed an annual income of ****** U.S. dollars in 2024.

These Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) files contain records representing a 5-percent sample of the occupied and vacant housing units in the United States and the people in the occupied units. People living in group quarters also are included. The files provide individual weights for persons and housing units, which when applied to the individual records, expand the sample to the relevant totals. Some of the items on the housing record are acreage, agricultural sales, allocation flags for housing items, bedrooms, condominium fee, contract rent, cost of utilities, family income in 1999, family, subfamily, and relationship recodes, farm residence, fire, hazard, and flood insurance, fuels used, gross rent, heating fuel, household income in 1999, household type, housing unit weight, 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, number of rooms, selected monthly owner costs, size of building (units in structure), state code, telephone service, tenure, vacancy status, value (of housing unit), vehicles available, year householder moved into unit, and year structure built. Some of the items on the person record are ability to speak English, age, allocation flags for population items, 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, persons weight, 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 Public Use Microdata Areas (PUMAs) and super-Public Use Microdata Areas (super-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. The 5-percent state-level files contain PUMAs, each having a minimum population of 100,000, and corresponding super-PUMA codes. Each state is separately identified and may be comprised of one or more super-PUMAs or PUMAs. Large metropolitan areas may be subdivided into super-PUMAs and PUMAs. PUMAs and super-PUMAs do not cross state lines. Super-PUMAs and PUMAs also are defined for place of residence on April 1, 1995, and place of work.

United States CPI U: AW: Housing: HFO: FB: Living Room, Kitchen & Dining Furniture data was reported at 0.347 % in 2017. This records a decrease from the previous number of 0.359 % for 2016. United States CPI U: AW: Housing: HFO: FB: Living Room, Kitchen & Dining Furniture data is updated yearly, averaging 0.473 % from Dec 1997 (Median) to 2017, with 21 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 0.621 % in 1998 and a record low of 0.330 % in 2013. United States CPI U: AW: Housing: HFO: FB: Living Room, Kitchen & Dining Furniture data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.I011: Consumer Price Index: Urban: Weights (Annual).

United States Import Price Index: Live Animals: Animal Products (LA) data was reported at 192.100 2000=100 in Sep 2018. This records a decrease from the previous number of 192.500 2000=100 for Aug 2018. United States Import Price Index: Live Animals: Animal Products (LA) data is updated monthly, averaging 115.350 2000=100 from Dec 1992 (Median) to Sep 2018, with 310 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 203.500 2000=100 in Oct 2014 and a record low of 87.100 2000=100 in Jul 1996. United States Import Price Index: Live Animals: Animal Products (LA) data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.I030: Import and Export Price Index: 2000=100: By Harmonized Index.

United States CPI W: Housing: HFO: FB: Living Room, Kitchen & Dining Furniture data was reported at 86.810 Dec1997=100 in Jun 2018. This records a decrease from the previous number of 87.411 Dec1997=100 for May 2018. United States CPI W: Housing: HFO: FB: Living Room, Kitchen & Dining Furniture data is updated monthly, averaging 90.605 Dec1997=100 from Dec 1997 (Median) to Jun 2018, with 247 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 103.300 Dec1997=100 in Nov 2000 and a record low of 84.547 Dec1997=100 in Aug 2016. United States CPI W: Housing: HFO: FB: Living Room, Kitchen & Dining Furniture data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.I012: Consumer Price Index: Urban Wage and Clerical Workers.

Graph and download economic data for Homeownership Rate in the United States (RHORUSQ156N) from Q1 1965 to Q1 2025 about homeownership, housing, rate, and USA.

This layer represents USDA Food Access Research Atlas data at the census tract geography. Low Income is defined as tracts with a poverty rate of 20% or higher, or tracts with median family income less than 80% of median family income of the state or metropolitan area. Low Access is defined as tracts where a significant number or share of residents is more than 1 mile (urban) or 10 miles (rural) from the nearest supermarket.http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-access-research-atlas/go-to-the-atlas.aspxFood accessLimited access to supermarkets, supercenters, grocery stores, or other sources of healthy and affordable food may make it harder for some Americans to eat a healthy diet. There are many ways to measure food store access for individuals and for neighborhoods, and many ways to define which areas are food deserts—neighborhoods that lack healthy food sources. Most measures and definitions take into account at least some of the following indicators of access:Accessibility to sources of healthy food, as measured by distance to a store or by the number of stores in an area.Individual-level resources that may affect accessibility, such as family income or vehicle availability.Neighborhood-level indicators of resources, such as the average income of the neighborhood and the availability of public transportation.In the Food Access Research Atlas, several indicators are available to measure food access along these dimensions. For example, users can choose alternative distance markers to measure low access in a neighborhood, such as the number and share of people more than half a mile to a supermarket or 1 mile to a supermarket. Users can also view other census-tract-level characteristics that provide context on food access in neighborhoods, such as whether the tract has a high percentage of households far from supermarkets and without vehicles, individuals with low income, or people residing in group quarters.Low-income neighborhoodsThe criteria for identifying a census tract as low income are from the Department of Treasury’s New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) program. This program defines a low-income census tract as any tract where:The tract’s poverty rate is 20 percent or greater; orThe tract’s median family income is less than or equal to 80 percent of the State-wide median family income; orThe tract is in a metropolitan area and has a median family income less than or equal to 80 percent of the metropolitan area's median family income.Low-access census tractsIn the Food Access Research Atlas, low access to healthy food is defined as being far from a supermarket, supercenter, or large grocery store ("supermarket" for short). A census tract is considered to have low access if a significant number or share of individuals in the tract is far from a supermarket.In the original Food Desert Locator, low access was measured as living far from a supermarket, where 1 mile was used in urban areas and 10 miles was used in rural areas to demarcate those who are far from a supermarket. In urban areas, about 70 percent of the population was within 1 mile of a supermarket, while in rural areas over 90 percent of the population was within 10 miles (see Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food: Updated Estimates of Distance to Supermarkets Using 2010 Data). Updating the original 1- and 10-mile low-access measure shows that an estimated 18.3 million people in these low-income and low-access census tracts were far from a supermarket in 2010.Three additional measures of food access based on distance to a supermarket are provided in the Atlas:One additional measure applies a 0.5-mile demarcation in urban areas and a 10-mile distance in rural areas. Using this measure, an estimated 52.5 million people, or 17 percent of the U.S. population, have low access to a supermarket;A second measure applies a 1.0-mile demarcation in urban areas and a 20-mile distance in rural areas. Under this measure, an estimated 16.5 million people, or 5.3 percent of the U.S. population, have low access to a supermarket; andA slightly more complex measure incorporates vehicle access directly into the measure, delineating low-income tracts in which a significant number of households are located far from a supermarket and do not have access to a vehicle. This measure also includes census tracts with populations that are so remote, that, even with a vehicle, driving to a supermarket may be considered a burden due to the great distance. Using this measure, an estimated 2.1 million households, or 1.8 percent of all households, in low-income census tracts are far from a supermarket and do not have a vehicle. An additional 0.3 million people are more than 20 miles from a supermarket.For each of the first three measures that are based solely on distance, a tract is designated as low access if the aggregate number of people in the census tract with low access is at least 500 or the percentage of people in the census tract with low access is at least 33 percent. For the final measure using vehicle availability, a tract is designated as having low vehicle access if at least one of the following is true:at least 100 households are more than ½ mile from the nearest supermarket and have no access to a vehicle; orat least 500 people or 33 percent of the population live more than 20 miles from the nearest supermarket, regardless of vehicle access.Methods used to assess distance to the nearest supermarket are the same for each of these measures. First, the entire country is divided into ½-km square grids, and data on the population are aerially allocated to these grids (see Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food: Updated Estimates of Distance to Supermarkets Using 2010 Data). Then, distance to the nearest supermarket is measured for each grid cell by calculating the distance between the geographic center of the ½-km square grid that contains estimates of the population (number of people and other subgroup characteristics) and the center of the grid with the nearest supermarket.Once the distance to the nearest supermarket is calculated for each grid cell, the estimated number of people or housing units that are more than 1 mile from a supermarket in urban tracts, or 10 miles in rural census tracts, is aggregated at the census-tract level (and similarly for the alternative distance markers). A census tract is considered rural if the population-weighted centroid of that tract is located in an area with a population of less than 2,500; all other tracts are considered urban tracts.Food desertsThe Food Access Research Atlas maps census tracts that are both low income (li) and low access (la), as measured by the different distance demarcations. This tool provides researchers and other users multiple ways to understand the characteristics that can contribute to food deserts, including income level, distance to supermarkets, and vehicle access.Additional tract-level indicators of accessVehicle availabilityA tract is identified as having low vehicle availability if more than 100 households in the tract report having no vehicle available and are more than 0.5 miles from the nearest supermarket. This corresponds closely to the 80th percentile of the distribution of the number of housing units in a census tract without vehicles at least 0.5 miles from a supermarket (the 80th percentile value was 106 housing units). This means that about 20 percent of all census tracts had more than 100 housing units that were 0.5 miles from a supermarket and without a vehicle. This indicator was applied to both urban and rural census tracts.Overall, 8.8 percent of all housing units in the United States do not have a vehicle, and 4.2 percent of all housing units are at least 0.5 mile from a store and without a vehicle. Vehicle availability is defined in the American Community Survey as the number of passenger cars, vans, or trucks with a capacity of 1-ton or less kept at the home and available for use by household members. The number of available vehicles includes those vehicles leased or rented for at least 1 month, as well as company, police, or government vehicles that are kept at home and available for non-business use.Whether a vehicle is available to a household for private use is an important additional indicator of access to healthy and affordable food. For households living far from a supermarket or large grocery store, access to a private vehicle may make accessing these retailers easier than relying on public or alternative means of transportation.Group quarters populationUsers may be interested in highlighting tracts with large shares of people living in group quarters. Group quarters are residential arrangements where an entity or organization owns and provides housing (and often services) for individuals residing in these buildings. This includes college dormitories, military quarters, correctional facilities, homeless shelters, residential treatment centers, and assisted living or skilled nursing facilities. These living arrangements frequently provide dining and food retail solely for their residents. While individuals living in these areas may appear to be far from a supermarket or grocery store, they may not truly experience difficulty accessing healthy and affordable food. Tracts in which 67 percent of individuals or more live in group quarters are highlighted.General tract characteristicsPopulation, tract totalGeographic level: census tractYear of data: 2010Definition: Total number of individuals residing in a tract.Data sources: Data are from the 2012 report, Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food: Updated Estimates of Distances to Supermarkets Using 2010 Data. Population data are reported at the block level from the 2010 Census of Population and Housing. These data were aerially allocated down to ½-kilometer-square grids across the United States.Low-income tractGeographic level: census tractYear of data: 2010Definition: A tract with either a poverty rate of 20

Manufactured Homes Market Outlook

The global manufactured homes market is projected to grow significantly over the forecast period, with a market size estimated at USD 28.5 billion in 2023 and expected to reach USD 47.1 billion by 2032, registering a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.6%. The growth factor is driven primarily by the increasing demand for affordable housing solutions, coupled with advancements in manufacturing technologies that make these homes more durable and aesthetically pleasing.

One of the primary growth factors for the manufactured homes market is affordability. Manufactured homes offer a cost-effective alternative to traditional site-built homes. The average cost of a manufactured home is significantly lower due to streamlined production processes and bulk purchasing of materials. This affordability makes them an attractive option for first-time homebuyers, retirees, and low-income families who may find it challenging to purchase traditional homes. Additionally, the cost of land and property taxes are often lower for manufactured homes, further enhancing their appeal.

Innovations in construction technologies and materials have also been pivotal in driving the market. Modern manufactured homes are built using high-quality materials and advanced construction techniques, making them more energy-efficient and resilient. Improvements in insulation, roofing, and HVAC systems have made these homes more sustainable and comfortable. Moreover, smart home integrations are becoming more common in manufactured homes, appealing to tech-savvy buyers looking for modern amenities at a fraction of the cost of traditional homes.

The growing trend toward sustainable living is another critical growth driver. As consumers become more environmentally conscious, the demand for eco-friendly housing solutions is rising. Manufactured homes can be designed with sustainable materials and energy-efficient systems, reducing their environmental footprint. Furthermore, the manufacturing process itself tends to generate less waste compared to traditional construction methods. This sustainable aspect aligns well with global efforts to combat climate change and reduce carbon emissions.

Regionally, North America dominates the manufactured homes market, driven by high demand in the United States, where manufactured housing is a popular option for affordable living. The market in Europe is also expanding, particularly in countries with stringent housing regulations and high real estate prices, such as the UK and Germany. The Asia Pacific region is anticipated to witness the highest growth rate, owing to urbanization and the need for affordable housing solutions in countries like India and China.

Product Type Analysis

The manufactured homes market can be segmented by product type into single-section and multi-section homes. Single-section homes, often referred to as "single-wides," are more compact and typically cover less than 1,000 square feet. These homes are easier to transport and set up, making them a popular choice for individuals or small families. Single-section homes tend to be more affordable due to their smaller size and simpler design, which makes them an attractive option for budget-conscious buyers.

Multi-section homes, also known as "double-wides" or "triple-wides," offer more space and can cover up to 3,000 square feet or more. These homes are designed with multiple sections that are assembled on-site. The extra space in multi-section homes allows for more customization and the inclusion of additional amenities such as larger kitchens, multiple bathrooms, and extra bedrooms. This makes them suitable for larger families or individuals looking for more spacious living accommodations.

The market for multi-section homes is growing faster than single-section homes due to their resemblance to traditional site-built homes. They offer a higher level of comfort and luxury while still being more affordable than conventional housing. The flexibility in design and increased living space make multi-section homes an appealing option for a broader range of consumers. Additionally, advancements in construction technology have made it easier to manufacture and assemble these larger units, further boosting their popularity.

In terms of market share, multi-section homes hold a larger portion due to the high demand for more spacious living solutions. However, single-section homes continue to maintain a significant presence, particularly in rural areas where land is

In 2019, the state of California had the least affordable child care for school-aged children. The cost of care is presented as a percentage of state median income for a two-parent family. A two-parent family, living in the state, spent 19 percent of their median income for full-time care of a school-aged child in a child care center.

United States PPI: FH: Household: Wood: Living Room data was reported at 248.400 1982=100 in Oct 2018. This records an increase from the previous number of 248.300 1982=100 for Sep 2018. United States PPI: FH: Household: Wood: Living Room data is updated monthly, averaging 164.000 1982=100 from Jan 1975 (Median) to Oct 2018, with 526 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 248.900 1982=100 in Aug 2018 and a record low of 61.600 1982=100 in Aug 1975. United States PPI: FH: Household: Wood: Living Room data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.I017: Producer Price Index: By Commodities.