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.

The average for 2021 based on 165 countries was 79.81 index points. The highest value was in Bermuda: 212.7 index points and the lowest value was in Syria: 33.25 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

Zurich, Lausanne, and Geneva were ranked as the most expensive cities worldwide with indices of ************************ Almost half of the 11 most expensive cities were in Switzerland.

The average for 2021 based on 10 countries was 59.91 index points. The highest value was in Singapore: 118.34 index points and the lowest value was in India: 40.44 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

Alaska, Hawaii, and Connecticut were the states with the highest average monthly utility costs in the United States in 2023. Residents paid about ****** U.S. dollars for their electricity bills in Hawaii, while the average monthly bill for natural gas came to *** U.S. dollars. This was significantly higher than in any other state. Bigger homes have higher utility costs Despite regional variations, single-family homes in the United States have grown bigger in size since 1975. This trend also means that, unless homeowners invest in energy savings measures, they will have to pay more for their utility costs. Which are the most affordable states to live in? According to the cost of living index, the three most affordable states to live in are Mississippi, Kansas, and Oklahoma. At the other end of the scale are Hawaii, District of Columbia, and New York. The index is based on housing, utilities, grocery items, transportation, health care, and miscellaneous goods and services. To buy a median priced home in Kansas City, a prospective home buyer will have to earn an annual salary of about ****** U.S. dollars.

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.

The average for 2021 based on 11 countries was 67.5 index points. The highest value was in Uruguay: 100.24 index points and the lowest value was in Suriname: 43.15 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

Amsterdam is set to maintain its position as Europe's most expensive city for apartment rentals in 2025, with median costs reaching 2,500 euros per month for a furnished unit. This figure is double the rent in Prague and significantly higher than other major European capitals like Paris, Berlin, and Madrid. The stark difference in rental costs across European cities reflects broader economic trends, housing policies, and the complex interplay between supply and demand in urban centers. Factors driving rental costs across Europe The disparity in rental prices across European cities can be attributed to various factors. In countries like Switzerland, Germany, and Austria, a higher proportion of the population lives in rental housing. This trend contributes to increased demand and potentially higher living costs in these nations. Conversely, many Eastern and Southern European countries have homeownership rates exceeding 90 percent, which may help keep rental prices lower in those regions. Housing affordability and market dynamics The relationship between housing prices and rental rates varies significantly across Europe. As of 2024, countries like Turkey, Iceland, Portugal, and Hungary had the highest house price to rent ratio indices. This indicates a widening gap between property values and rental costs since 2015. The affordability of homeownership versus renting differs greatly among European nations, with some countries experiencing rapid increases in property values that outpace rental growth. These market dynamics influence rental costs and contribute to the diverse rental landscape observed across European cities.

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

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.

Geneva stands out as Europe's most expensive city for apartment purchases in early 2025, with prices reaching a staggering 15,720 euros per square meter. This Swiss city's real estate market dwarfs even high-cost locations like Zurich and London, highlighting the extreme disparities in housing affordability across the continent. The stark contrast between Geneva and more affordable cities like Nantes, France, where the price was 3,700 euros per square meter, underscores the complex factors influencing urban property markets in Europe. Rental market dynamics and affordability challenges While purchase prices vary widely, rental markets across Europe also show significant differences. London maintained its position as the continent's priciest city for apartment rentals in 2023, with the average monthly costs for a rental apartment amounting to 36.1 euros per square meter. This figure is double the rent in Lisbon, Portugal or Madrid, Spain, and substantially higher than in other major capitals like Paris and Berlin. The disparity in rental costs reflects broader economic trends, housing policies, and the intricate balance of supply and demand in urban centers. Economic factors influencing housing costs The European housing market is influenced by various economic factors, including inflation and energy costs. As of April 2025, the European Union's inflation rate stood at 2.4 percent, with significant variations among member states. Romania experienced the highest inflation at 4.9 percent, while France and Cyprus maintained lower rates. These economic pressures, coupled with rising energy costs, contribute to the overall cost of living and housing affordability across Europe. The volatility in electricity prices, particularly in countries like Italy where rates are projected to reach 153.83 euros per megawatt hour by February 2025, further impacts housing-related expenses for both homeowners and renters.

Abstract

China Living Standards Survey (CLSS) consists of one household survey and one community (village) survey, conducted in Hebei and Liaoning Provinces (northern and northeast China) in July 1995 and July 1997 respectively. Five villages from each three sample counties of each province were selected (six were selected in Liaoyang County of Liaoning Province because of administrative area change). About 880 farm households were selected from total thirty-one sample villages for the household survey. The same thirty-one villages formed the samples of community survey. This document provides information on the content of different questionnaires, the survey design and implementation, data processing activities, and the different available data sets.

Geographic coverage

The China Living Standards Survey (CLSS) was conducted only in Hebei and Liaoning Provinces (northern and northeast China).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The CLSS sample is not a rigorous random sample drawn from a well-defined population. Instead it is only a rough approximation of the rural population in Hebei and Liaoning provinces in Northeastern China. The reason for this is that part of the motivation for the survey was to compare the current conditions with conditions that existed in Hebei and Liaoning in the 1930’s. Because of this, three counties in Hebei and three counties in Liaoning were selected as "primary sampling units" because data had been collected from those six counties by the Japanese occupation government in the 1930’s. Within each of these six counties (xian) five villages (cun) were selected, for an overall total of 30 villages (in fact, an administrative change in one village led to 31 villages being selected). In each county a "main village" was selected that was in fact a village that had been surveyed in the 1930s. Because of the interest in these villages 50 households were selected from each of these six villages (one for each of the six counties). In addition, four other villages were selected in each county. These other villages were not drawn randomly but were selected so as to "represent" variation within the county. Within each of these villages 20 households were selected for interviews. Thus the intended sample size was 780 households, 130 from each county.

Unlike county and village selection, the selection of households within each village was done according to standard sample selection procedures. In each village, a list of all households in the village was obtained from village leaders. An "interval" was calculated as the number of the households in the village divided by the number of households desired for the sample (50 for main villages and 20 for other villages). For the list of households, a random number was drawn between 1 and the interval number. This was used as a starting point. The interval was then added to this number to get a second number, then the interval was added to this second number to get a third number, and so on. The set of numbers produced were the numbers used to select the households, in terms of their order on the list.

In fact, the number of households in the sample is 785, as opposed to 780. Most of this difference is due to a village in which 24 households were interviewed, as opposed to the goal of 20 households

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Household Questionnaire

The household questionnaire contains sections that collect data on household demographic structure, education, housing conditions, land, agricultural management, household non-agricultural business, household expenditures, gifts, remittances and other income sources, and saving and loans. For some sections (general household information, schooling, housing, gift-exchange, remittance, other income, and credit and savings) the individual designated by the household members as the household head provided responses. For some other sections (farm land, agricultural management, family-run non-farm business, and household consumption expenditure) a member identified as the most knowledgeable provided responses. Identification codes for respondents of different sections indicate who provided the information. In sections where the information collected pertains to individuals (employment), whenever possible, each member of the household was asked to respond for himself or herself, except that parents were allowed to respond for younger children. Therefore, in the case of the employment section it is possible that the information was not provided by the relevant person; variables in this section indicate when this is true.

The household questionnaire was completed in a one-time interview in the summer of 1995. The survey was designed so that more sensitive issues such as credit and savings were discussed near the end. The content of each section is briefly described below.

Section 0 SURVEY INFORMATION

This section mainly summarizes the results of the survey visits. The following information was entered into the computer: whether the survey and the data entry were completed, codes of supervisor’s brief comments on interviewer, data entry operator, and related revising suggestion (e.g., 1. good, 2. revise at office, and 3. re-interview needed). Information about the date of interview, the names of interviewer, supervisor, data enterer, and detail notes of interviewer and supervisor were not entered into the computer.

Section 1 GENERAL HOUSEHOLD INFORMATION

1A HOUSEHOLD STRUCTURE 1B INFORMATION ABOUT THE HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS’ PARENTS 1C INFORMATION ABOUT THE CHILDREN WHO ARE NOT LIVING IN HOME

Section 1A lists the personal id code, sex, relationship to the household head, ethnic group, type of resident permit (agricultural [nongye], non-agricultural [fei nongye], or no resident permit), date of birth, marital status of all people who spent the previous night in that household and for household members who are temporarily away from home. The household head is listed first and receives the personal id code 1. Household members were defined to include “all the people who normally live and eat their meals together in this dwelling.” Those who were absent more than nine of the last twelve months were excluded, except for the head of household. For individuals who are married and whose spouse resides in the household, the personal id number of the spouse is noted. By doing so, information on the spouse can be collected by appropriately merging information from the section 1A and other parts of the survey.

Section 1B collects information on the parents of all household members. For individuals whose parents reside in the household, parents’ personal id numbers are noted, and information can be obtained by appropriately merging information from other parts of the survey. For individuals whose parents do not reside in the household, information is recorded on whether each parent is alive, as well as their schooling and occupation.

Section 1C collects information for children of household members who are not living in home. Children who have died are not included. The information on the name, sex, types of resident permit, age, education level, education cost, reasons not living in home, current living place, and type of job of each such child is recorded.

Section 2 SCHOOLING

In Section 2, information about literacy and numeracy, school attendance, completion, and current enrollment for all household members of preschool age and older. The interpretation of pre-school age appears to have varied, with the result that while education information is available for some children of pre-school age, not all pre-school children were included in this section. But for ages 6 and above information is available for nearly all individuals, so in essence the data on schooling can be said to apply all persons 6 age and above. For those who were enrolled in school at the time of the survey, information was also collected on school attendance, expenses, and scholarships. If applicable, information on serving as an apprentice, technical or professional training was also collected.

Section 3 EMPLOYMENT

3A GENERAL INFORMATION 3B MAJOR NON-FARM JOB IN 1994 3C THE SECOND NON-FARM JOB IN 1994 3D OTHER EMPLOYMENT ACTIVITIES IN 1994 3E SEARCHING FOR NON-FARM JOB 3F PROCESS FOR GETTING MAJOR NON-FARM JOB 3G CORVEE LABOR

All individuals age thirteen and above were asked to respond to the employment activity questions in Section 3. Section 3A collects general information on farm and non-farm employment, such as whether or not the household member worked on household own farm in 1994, when was the last year the member worked on own farm if he/she did not work in 1994, work days and hours during busy season, occupation and sector codes of the major, second, and third non-farm jobs, work days and total income of these non-farm jobs. There is a variable which indicates whether or not the individual responded for himself or herself.

Sections 3B and 3C collect detailed information on the major and the second non-farm job. Information includes number of months worked and which month in 1994 the member worked on these jobs, average works days (or hours) per month (per day), total number of years worked for these jobs by the end of 1994, different components of income, type of employment contracts. Information on employer’s ownership type and location was also collected.

Section 3D collects information on average hours spent doing chores and housework at home every day during non-busy and busy season. The chores refer to cooking, laundry, cleaning, shopping, cutting woods, as well as small-scale farm yard animals raising, for example, pigs or chickens. Large-scale animal

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.

As of September 2024, Mumbai had the highest cost of living among other cities in the country, with an index value of ****. Gurgaon, a satellite city of Delhi and part of the National Capital Region (NCR) followed it with an index value of ****.  What is cost of living? The cost of living varies depending on geographical regions and factors that affect the cost of living in an area include housing, food, utilities, clothing, childcare, and fuel among others. The cost of living is calculated based on different measures such as the consumer price index (CPI), living cost indexes, and wage price index. CPI refers to the change in the value of consumer goods and services. The wage price index, on the other hand, measures the change in labor services prices due to market pressures. Lastly, the living cost indexes calculate the impact of changing costs on different households. The relationship between wages and costs determines affordability and shifts in the cost of living. Mumbai tops the list Mumbai usually tops the list of most expensive cities in India. As the financial and entertainment hub of the country, Mumbai offers wide opportunities and attracts talent from all over the country. It is the second-largest city in India and has one of the most expensive real estates in the world.

Abstract

The Living Conditions Monitoring Survey conducted in 2002/2003 was a nation-wide survey. The sample design and sample size used in the survey allow for reliable estimates at province, location (Rural/Urban) and national levels.

The main objectives of the LCMSIII Survey are to: - Monitor the impact of Government policies, programs and donor support on the well being of the Zambian population - Monitor and evaluate the implementation of some of the programs envisaged in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) - Monitor poverty and its distribution in Zambia - Provide various users with a set of reliable indicators against which to monitor development - Provide province specific poverty profiles using different poverty lines - Identify vulnerable groups in society and enhance targeting in policy formulation and implementation - Provide data required for developing new national and province specific weights for the Consumer Price Index (CPI) - Provide data required for estimating Gross Domestic Products? (GDP) household final consumption

The Living Conditions Monitoring Survey 2002/2003 collected data on the living conditions of households and persons in the areas of education, health, economic activities and employment, child nutrition, death in the households, income sources, income levels, food production, household consumption expenditure, access to clean and safe water and sanitation, housing and access to various socio-economic facilities and infrastructure such as schools, health facilities, transport, banks, credit facilities, markets, etc.

Geographic coverage

The survey has a nationwide coverage on a sample basis. It covers both rural and urban areas in all the nine provinces. Hence it draws a very big sample size of about 19,600 households.

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals

Universe

The eligible household population consisted of all households.Excluded from the sample were institutional populations in hospitals, boarding schools, colleges, universities, prisons, hotels, refugee camps, orphanages, military camps and bases and diplomats accredited to Zambia in embassies and high commissions. Private households living around these institutions and cooking separately were included such as teachers whose houses are within the premises of a school, doctors and other workers living on or around hospital premises, police living in police camps in separate houses, etc. Persons who were in hospitals, boarding schools, etc. but were usual members of households were included in their respective households. Ordinary workers other than diplomats working in embassies and high commissions were included in the survey also. Others with diplomatic status working in the UN, World Bank etc. were included. Also included were persons or households who live in institutionalized places such as hostels, lodges, etc. but cook separately. The major distinguishing factor between eligible and non eligible households in the survey is the cooking and eating separately versus food provided by an institution in a common/communal dining hall or eating place. The former cases were included while the latter were excluded.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Living Conditions Monitoring Survey III (LCMSIII) was designed to cover 520 Standard Enumeration Areas (SEAs) or approximately 10,000 non-institutionalized private households residing in both the rural and urban areas of all the nine provinces in Zambia. The survey was carried out for a period of 12 months using a rolling sample. For the purposes of this survey, a survey reference month had 36 days instead of 30 or 31 days, as is the case with calendar months. This implies that the 360 days in a year were divided into 10 cycles of 36 days each. As a result 52 SEAs, which is one-tenth of the 520 SEAs, were covered every cycle countrywide.

Sample Stratification and Allocation The sampling frame used for LCMSIII survey was developed from the 2000 census of population and housing. The frame is administratively demarcated into 9 provinces, which are further divided into 72 districts. The districts are further subdivided into 155 constituencies, which are also divided into wards. Wards consist of Census Supervisory Areas (CSA), which in turn embrace Standard Enumeration areas (SEAs). For the purposes of this survey, SEAs constituted the ultimate Primary Sampling Units (PSUs).

In order to have equal precision in the estimates in all the provinces and at the same time take into account variation in the sizes of the provinces, the survey adopted the Square Root sample allocation method, (Lesli Kish, 1987). This approach offers a better compromise between equal and proportional allocation methods in terms of reliability of both combined and separate estimates. The allocation of the sample points (PSUs) to rural and urban strata was almost proportional. The allocated provincial samples were multiples of 10 so as to facilitate the rolling of equal samples during the 10 cycles of data collection.

Sample Selection The LCMSIII survey employed a two-stage stratified cluster sample design whereby during the first stage, 520 SEAs were selected with Probability Proportional to Estimated Size (PPES). The size measure was taken from the frame developed from the 2000 census of population and housing. During the second stage, households were systematically selected from an enumeration area listing. The survey was designed to provide reliable estimates at provincial, residential and national levels.

Selection of Standard Enumeration Areas (SEAs) Please see section 2.5.3 of the Survey Report in External Resources

Selection of Households The LCMSIII survey commenced by listing all the households in the selected SEAs. In the case of rural SEAs, households were stratified and listed according to their agricultural activity status. Therefore, there were four explicit strata created in each rural SEA namely, the Small Scale Stratum (SSS), the Medium Scale Stratum (MSS), the Large Scale Stratum (LSS) and the Non-agricultural Stratum (NAS). For the purposes of the LCMSIII survey, about 7, 5 and 3 households were supposed to be selected from the SSS, MSS and NAS, respectively. The large scale households were selected on a 100 percent basis. The urban SEAs were implicitly stratified into low cost, medium cost and high cost areas according to CSO's and local authority classification of residential areas.

About 15 and 25 households were sampled from rural and urban SEAs, respectively. However, the number of rural households selected in some cases exceeded the desired sample size of 15 households depending on the availability of large scale farming households.

The selection of households from various strata was preceded by assigning fully responding households sampling serial numbers. The circular systematic sampling method was used to select households. The method assumes that households are arranged in a circle (G. Kalton, 1983) and the following relationship applies:

Let N = nk, Where: N = Total number of households assigned sampling serial numbers in a stratum n = Total desired sample size to be drawn from a stratum in an SEA k = The sampling interval in a given SEA calculated as k=N/n.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Two types of questionnaires will be used in the survey. These are:- 1. The Listing Booklet - to be used for listing all the households residing in the selected Standard Enumeration Areas (SEAs) 2. The Main questionnaire - to be used for collecting detailed information on all household members.

The Main Household questionnaire was divided into two parts, namely:- 1. Main Questionnaire Part I - used for collecting information on the various aspects of the living conditions of the households. 2. Main Questionnaire Part II - all the information collected using the household expenditure diary was later on transcribed to this questionnaire in aggregates so as to make computer data capturing easy. This part of the questionnaire was also used to collect information on household Income, Non-Farm enterprises and deaths in the households.

Cleaning operations

Data Processing and Analysis: The data from the LCMSIII survey was processed and analyzed using the CSPRO and the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) software respectively. Data entry was done from all the provincial offices with 100 percent verification, whilst data cleaning and analysis was undertaken at CSO's headquarters.

Graph and download economic data for Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: Rent of Primary Residence in U.S. City Average (CUUR0000SEHA) from Dec 1914 to May 2025 about primary, rent, urban, consumer, CPI, inflation, price index, indexes, price, and USA.

The average for 2021 based on 165 countries was 105.854 index points. The highest value was in South Korea: 208.84 index points and the lowest value was in India: 58.17 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

Single Family Home Prices in the United States increased to 435300 USD in June from 423700 USD in May of 2025. This dataset provides - United States Existing Single Family Home Prices- actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

Abstract

The purpose of the Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) survey is to obtain information on the income, consumption pattern, incidence of poverty, and saving propensities for different groups of people in Palau. This information will be used to guide policy makers in framing socio-economic developmental policies and in initiating financial measures for improving economic conditions of the people.

Some more specific outputs from the survey are listed below:

a) To obtain expenditure weights and other useful data for the revision of the consumer price index; b) To supplement the data available for use in compiling official estimates of household accounts in the systems of national accounts; c) To supply basic data needed for policy making in connection with social and economic planning, including producing as many of Palau's National Minimum Development Indicators (NMDI's) as possible; d) To provide data for assessing the impact on household living conditions of existing or proposed economic and social measures, particularly changes in the structure of household expenditures and in household consumption; e) To gather information on poverty lines and incidence of poverty throughout Palau.

Geographic coverage

National Coverage, excluding Sonsorol and Hatohobei. Urban and Rural.

Analysis unit

• Households;
• Individuals.

Universe

All private households and group quarters (people living in Work dormitories, as it is an important aspect of the subject matter focused on in this survey, and not addressed elsewhere).

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The sampling frame used was the 2012 Palau census, which provided population figures for everyone living in both private households and group quarters (e.g. worker barracks, school dormitories, prison). The sampling selection was done separately in private dwellings and group quarters.

It is an accepted practice for the Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) to cover all living quarters regarded as private dwellings, and the Palau 2013/14 HIES will follow this recommendation.

For group quarters it is also recommended to exclude the prison, as it is not considered appropriate to include such institutions in a survey such as HIES.

A decision as to whether the remaining group quarters should be included is based on the following criteria:

1) Ease in accessing and covering them in a survey such as HIES 2) Relevance to the subject matter of the survey 3) Whether their impact on the subject matter is mostly covered already

Under these criteria, the following recommendations are made: -School/college dormitories: Will exclude from HIES as these individuals will be covered in the households from which they came (if selected) -Work dormitories: Aim to include in the HIES as they are an important aspect of the subject matter focused on in this survey, and not addressed elsewhere -Live aboard: Will exclude due to the movement of such vehicles, and the minimal impact they may have on such a survey -Convents/religious quarters: Will exclude based on their expected minimum impact on the survey subject matter

NB: Given students in dorms are expected to have a high portion of their income and expenses covered in their original household of origin, and there were no religious group quarters identified during the census, only persons in the prison and living aboard are expected to be excluded from the survey. These people account for 81 out of 2,322 group quarters residents (only 3.6%).

Although the response rates were down in the 2006 HIES, with a smaller more experienced team working over 12 months, it is expected there will be improvements in this area. However, the expected sample loss of 10 per cent was probably too ambitious, and given the actual rate ended up at 287/1,063 = 27 per cent, it is more realistic to assume a sample loss of around 15 per cent with improvements for the 2013/14 HIES. Based on the RSEs presented in 2.3.2, it also appears that the 20 per cent desirable sample produced sound results for the survey, and with higher response rates anticipated, these results from a sample error perspective should improve. It is therefore proposed for the 2013/14 Palau HIES that a sample size of 20 per cent be adopted, which also allows for sample loss of 15 per cent.

In the 2006 Palau HIES, effort was made to design a sample which could produce results for the six domains (stratum). Whilst reasonable results were generated for each of these domains, it was felt that post survey, there was no great use of these results at that level. For the 2013 HIES it is proposed to focus on generating reliable results at the national level, with focus also being place on producing results for the urban/rural split. In the case of Palau, the urban population is considered to consist of the states of Koror and Airai.

The last phase to finalizing the sample numbers was to adjust the desirable sample numbers, so that they could be easily applied by the HIES team in a practical manner over the course of the 12 month fieldwork. This was achieved by modifying the sample counts (not too much) to enable sample sizes each round would be of a similar size, and workloads for each enumerator were the same size each round. The desirable workload for an enumerator covering the PD population was 10 households, whereas this figure was increased to 14 persons for GQs as it was envisaged the amount of time required to cover a person in a GQ would be significantly less. With this in mind, we wanted to ideally have the PD sample to be divisible by 160 so this would enable an even number of households each round, whilst maintaining a workload of 10 households for interviewers covering these areas. For the GQ sample, given the desirable number of GQs was already 225, and 16x14=224, then a simple reduction of 1 in the GQ sample would result in a nice even workload of 14 persons per round for 1 interviewer. This logic was also applied to the split between urban and rural resulting in 14 workloads in urban and 2 workloads in rural.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Developped in English, a questionnaire consisting of four Modules and a Weekly Diary covering 2 weeks was used for the Republic of Palau Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) 2013. Each Module covers distinct but connected portion of the Household.

The Modules are as follows: -Module 1 - Demographic Information: · Demographic Profile · Labor Force Status · Health Status · Communication Status -Module 2 - Household Expenditure: · Housing Characteristics · Housing Tenure Expenditure · Utilities & Communication Details · Utilities & Communication Expenditure · Land & Home Details · Land & Home Expenditure · Household Goods & Assets Details · Household Goods & Assets Expenditures · Vehicles & Accessories Details · Vehicles & Accessories Expenditures · Private Travel Details · Private Travel Expenditures · Household Services Expenditure · Contributions to Special Occasions · Provisions of Financial Support · Loans · Household Assets Insurance & Taxes · Personal Insurance -Module 3 - Individual Expenditures: · Education grants and scholarships · Education Identifications · Education Expenditures · Health Identifications · Health Expenditures · Clothing Identification · Clothing Expenditure · Communication Identification · Communication Expenditures · Luxury Items Identification · Luxury Items Expenditures -Module 4 - Income: · Wages & Salary: In country (current) · Wages & Salary: Overseas (last 12 months) · Wages & Salary: In country (last 12 months) · Income from Non Subsistence Business · Description of Agriculture & Forestry Activities · Income from Agriculture & Forestry Activities · Description of Handicraft & Home Processed Food Activities · Income from Handicraft & Home Processed Food Activities · Description of Livestock & Aquaculture Activities · Income from Livestock & Aquaculture Activities · Description of Fishing & Hunting Activities · Income from Fishing & Hunting Activities · Property Income, Transfer Income & Other Receipts · Remittances & Other Cash Gifts -Weekly Diary - Covering 14 Days (2 weeks): · Daily expenditure of food and non-food items · Payments of service made · Gambling winning and losses · Items received for free · Home produced food and non-food items.

All questionnaires are provided as external resources in this documentation.

Cleaning operations

Program: CSPro 5.1x

Data editing took place at a number of stages throughout the processing, including:

a) Office editing and coding b) During data entry; Error report correction; Secondary editing by Quality Control Officer (QCO) c) Structure checking and completeness

Detailed documentation of the editing of data can be found in the "Data processing guidelines" document provided as an external resource.

Response rate

Some 1,145 households were selected (in private dwellings and workers quarters) to participate in the survey, and the response rate was 75.8% (i.e. 869 households responded). This response rate allows for statistically significant analysis at the national, urban and rural level.

Response rates for private households by State: -Koror: 355 households responded out of 480 selected => 73.9%; -Airai: 119 households responded out of 160 selected => 74.4%; -URBAN: 474 households responded out of 640 selected => 74.1%; -Kayangel: 0 households responded out of 10 selected => 0%; -Ngarchelong: 27 households responded out of 30 selected => 90%; -Ngaraard: 22 households responded

analyze the consumer expenditure survey (ce) with r the consumer expenditure survey (ce) is the primo data source to understand how americans spend money. participating households keep a running diary about every little purchase over the year. those diaries are then summed up into precise expenditure categories. how else are you gonna know that the average american household spent $34 (±2) on bacon, $826 (±17) on cellular phones, and $13 (±2) on digital e-readers in 2011? an integral component of the market basket calculation in the consumer price index, this survey recently became available as public-use microdata and they're slowly releasing historical files back to 1996. hooray! for a t aste of what's possible with ce data, look at the quick tables listed on their main page - these tables contain approximately a bazillion different expenditure categories broken down by demographic groups. guess what? i just learned that americans living in households with $5,000 to $9,999 of annual income spent an average of $283 (±90) on pets, toys, hobbies, and playground equipment (pdf page 3). you can often get close to your statistic of interest from these web tables. but say you wanted to look at domestic pet expenditure among only households with children between 12 and 17 years old. another one of the thirteen web tables - the consumer unit composition table - shows a few different breakouts of households with kids, but none matching that exact population of interest. the bureau of labor statistics (bls) (the survey's designers) and the census bureau (the survey's administrators) have provided plenty of the major statistics and breakouts for you, but they're not psychic. if you want to comb through this data for specific expenditure categories broken out by a you-defined segment of the united states' population, then let a little r into your life. fun starts now. fair warning: only analyze t he consumer expenditure survey if you are nerd to the core. the microdata ship with two different survey types (interview and diary), each containing five or six quarterly table formats that need to be stacked, merged, and manipulated prior to a methodologically-correct analysis. the scripts in this repository contain examples to prepare 'em all, just be advised that magnificent data like this will never be no-assembly-required. the folks at bls have posted an excellent summary of what's av ailable - read it before anything else. after that, read the getting started guide. don't skim. a few of the descriptions below refer to sas programs provided by the bureau of labor statistics. you'll find these in the C:\My Directory\CES\2011\docs directory after you run the download program. this new github repository contains three scripts: 2010-2011 - download all microdata.R lo op through every year and download every file hosted on the bls's ce ftp site import each of the comma-separated value files into r with read.csv depending on user-settings, save each table as an r data file (.rda) or stat a-readable file (.dta) 2011 fmly intrvw - analysis examples.R load the r data files (.rda) necessary to create the 'fmly' table shown in the ce macros program documentation.doc file construct that 'fmly' table, using five quarters of interviews (q1 2011 thru q1 2012) initiate a replicate-weighted survey design object perform some lovely li'l analysis examples replicate the %mean_variance() macro found in "ce macros.sas" and provide some examples of calculating descriptive statistics using unimputed variables replicate the %compare_groups() macro found in "ce macros.sas" and provide some examples of performing t -tests using unimputed variables create an rsqlite database (to minimize ram usage) containing the five imputed variable files, after identifying which variables were imputed based on pdf page 3 of the user's guide to income imputation initiate a replicate-weighted, database-backed, multiply-imputed survey design object perform a few additional analyses that highlight the modified syntax required for multiply-imputed survey designs replicate the %mean_variance() macro found in "ce macros.sas" and provide some examples of calculating descriptive statistics using imputed variables repl icate the %compare_groups() macro found in "ce macros.sas" and provide some examples of performing t-tests using imputed variables replicate the %proc_reg() and %proc_logistic() macros found in "ce macros.sas" and provide some examples of regressions and logistic regressions using both unimputed and imputed variables replicate integrated mean and se.R match each step in the bls-provided sas program "integr ated mean and se.sas" but with r instead of sas create an rsqlite database when the expenditure table gets too large for older computers to handle in ram export a table "2011 integrated mean and se.csv" that exactly matches the contents of the sas-produced "2011 integrated mean and se.lst" text file click here to view these three scripts for...