The Census Bureau determines that a person is living in poverty when his or her total household income compared with the size and composition of the household is below the poverty threshold. The Census Bureau uses the federal government's official definition of poverty to determine the poverty threshold. Beginning in 2000, individuals were presented with the option to select one or more races. In addition, the Census asked individuals to identify their race separately from identifying their Hispanic origin. The Census has published individual tables for the races and ethnicities provided as supplemental information to the main table that does not dissaggregate by race or ethnicity. Race categories include the following - White, Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, Some other race, and Two or more races. We are not including specific combinations of two or more races as the counts of these combinations are small. Ethnic categories include - Hispanic or Latino and White Non-Hispanic. This data comes from the American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year estimates, table B17001. The ACS collects these data from a sample of households on a rolling monthly basis. ACS aggregates samples into one-, three-, or five-year periods. CTdata.org generally carries the five-year datasets, as they are considered to be the most accurate, especially for geographic areas that are the size of a county or smaller.Poverty status determined is the denominator for the poverty rate. It is the population for which poverty status was determined so when poverty is calculated they exclude institutionalized people, people in military group quarters, people in college dormitories, and unrelated individuals under 15 years of age.Below poverty level are households as determined by the thresholds based on the criteria of looking at household size, Below poverty level are households as determined by the thresholds based on the criteria of looking at household size, number of children, and age of householder.number of children, and age of householder.

Racial disparities arise across many vital areas of American life, including employment, health, and interpersonal treatment. For example, 1 in 3 Black children live in poverty (vs. 1 in 9 White children) and on average, Black Americans live 4 fewer years than White Americans. Which disparity is more likely to spark reduction efforts? We find that highlighting disparities in health-related (vs. economic) outcomes spurs greater social media engagement and support for disparity-mitigating policy. Further, reading about racial health disparities elicits greater support for action (e.g., protesting) than economic or belonging-based disparities. This occurs, in part, because people view health disparities as violating morally-sacred values which enhances perceived injustice. This work elucidates which manifestations of racial inequality are most likely to prompt Americans to action., The data from Studies 1a, 1b, 3, 4a, and 4b were collected via online platfroms (i.e., Mturk.com, Prolific Academic, and NORC’s AmeriSpeak Panel). All analyses were run in R with the R code provided (title: Health_Disparities_Syntax.R)., , # Highlighting Health Consequences of Racial Disparities Sparks Support for Action

There are a total of 5 datasets available (Studies 1a, 1b, 3, 4a, 4b) each collected by the researchers from online survey platforms. All data files are .sav files. We recommed using SPSS or RStudio to work with the data. We provide our code using RStudio and a codebook with the name of all variables in each dataset.

Description of the data and file structure

Study 1a and Study 1b utilized a within-subjects experimental design (S1a: N=191; S1b, preregistered: N=337, 50% White participants, 50% Black participants) where samples of U.S. citizens recruited from MTurk.com and Prolific Academic read nine examples of racial disparities, three each from the domains of health, economics, and belonging. After each example, participants reported whether the disparity was unjust and fair (reverse-coded; 2-items averaged to create a perceived injustice scale). Participants also indicated their agreement (1=s...

To assist communities in identifying racially/ethnically-concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), HUD has developed a census tract-based definition of R/ECAPs. The definition involves a racial/ethnic concentration threshold and a poverty test. The racial/ethnic concentration threshold is straightforward: R/ECAPs must have a non-white population of 50 percent or more. Regarding the poverty threshold, Wilson (1980) defines neighborhoods of extreme poverty as census tracts with 40 percent or more of individuals living at or below the poverty line. Because overall poverty levels are substantially lower in many parts of the country, HUD supplements this with an alternate criterion. Thus, a neighborhood can be a R/ECAP if it has a poverty rate that exceeds 40% or is three or more times the average tract poverty rate for the metropolitan/micropolitan area, whichever threshold is lower. Census tracts with this extreme poverty that satisfy the racial/ethnic concentration threshold are deemed R/ECAPs. This translates into the following equation: Where i represents census tracts, () is the metropolitan/micropolitan (CBSA) mean tract poverty rate, is the ith tract poverty rate, () is the non-Hispanic white population in tract i, and Pop is the population in tract i.While this definition of R/ECAP works well for tracts in CBSAs, place outside of these geographies are unlikely to have racial or ethnic concentrations as high as 50 percent. In these areas, the racial/ethnic concentration threshold is set at 20 percent.

Data Source: American Community Survey (ACS), 2009-2013; Decennial Census (2010); Brown Longitudinal Tract Database (LTDB) based on decennial census data, 1990, 2000 & 2010.

Related AFFH-T Local Government, PHA Tables/Maps: Table 4, 7; Maps 1-17. Related AFFH-T State Tables/Maps: Table 4, 7; Maps 1-15, 18.

References:Wilson, William J. (1980). The Declining Significance of Race: Blacks and Changing American Institutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

To learn more about R/ECAPs visit:https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/affh ; https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/FHEO/documents/AFFH-T-Data-Documentation-AFFHT0006-July-2020.pdf, for questions about the spatial attribution of this dataset, please reach out to us at GISHelpdesk@hud.gov. Date of Coverage: 11/2017

This dataset contains R/ECAP data for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Region at the census tract level.

To assist communities in identifying racially/ethnically-concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), HUD has developed a census tract-based definition of R/ECAPs.

To assist communities in identifying racially/ethnically-concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), HUD has developed a census tract-based definition of R/ECAPs. The definition involves a racial/ethnic concentration threshold and a poverty test. The racial/ethnic concentration threshold is straightforward: R/ECAPs must have a non-white population of 50 percent or more. Regarding the poverty threshold, Wilson (1980) defines neighborhoods of extreme poverty as census tracts with 40 percent or more of individuals living at or below the poverty line. Because overall poverty levels are substantially lower in many parts of the country, HUD supplements this with an alternate criterion. Thus, a neighborhood can be a R/ECAP if it has a poverty rate that exceeds 40% or is three or more times the average tract poverty rate for the metropolitan/micropolitan area, whichever threshold is lower. Census tracts with this extreme poverty that satisfy the racial/ethnic concentration threshold are deemed R/ECAPs.

Data Source: Decennial census (2010); American Community Survey (ACS), 2006-2010; Brown Longitudinal Tract Database (LTDB) based on decennial census data, 2000 & 1990 References: Wilson, William J. (1980). The Declining Significance of Race: Blacks and Changing American Institutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Data Source: American Community Survey (ACS), 2009-2013; Decennial Census (2010); Brown Longitudinal Tract Database (LTDB) based on decennial census data, 1990, 2000 & 2010.

Related AFFH-T Local Government, PHA Tables/Maps: Table 4, 7; Maps 1-17.

Related AFFH-T State Tables/Maps: Table 4, 7; Maps 1-15, 18.

References: Wilson, William J. (1980). The Declining Significance of Race: Blacks and Changing American Institutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

ACS 1-year estimates are based on data collected over one calendar year, offering more current information but with a higher margin of error. ACS 5-year estimates combine five years of data, providing more reliable information but less current. Both are based on probability samples. Some racial and ethnic categories are suppressed to avoid misleading estimates when the relative standard error exceeds 30%.

Data Source: American Community Survey (ACS) 1- & 5-Year Estimates

Why This Matters

Poverty threatens the overall well-being of individuals and families, limiting access to stable housing, healthy foods, health care, and educational and employment opportunities, among other basic needs.Poverty is associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, including chronic physical and mental illness, lower life expectancy, developmental delays, and others.

Racist policies and practices have contributed to racial economic inequities. Nationally, Black, Indigenous, and people of color experience poverty at higher rates than white Americans, on average.

The District's Response

Boosting assistance programs that provide temporary cash and health benefits to help low-income residents meet their basic needs, including Medicaid, TANF For District Families, SNAP, etc.

Housing assistance and employment and career training programs to support resident’s housing and employment security. These include the Emergency Rental Assistance Program, Permanent Supportive Housing vouchers, Career MAP, the DC Infrastructure Academy, among other programs and services.

Creation of the DC Commission on Poverty to study poverty issues, evaluate poverty reduction initiatives, and make recommendations to the Mayor and the Council.

2020 data excluded because the U.S. Census Bureau did not release 2020 ACS 1-year estimates due to COVID-19. Some racial and ethnic categories are suppressed to avoid misleading estimates when the relative standard error exceeds 30%.

Data Source: American Community Survey (ACS) 1-Year Estimates

Why This Matters

Poverty threatens the overall well-being of individuals and families, limiting access to stable housing, healthy foods, health care, and educational and employment opportunities, among other basic needs.Poverty is associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, including chronic physical and mental illness, lower life expectancy, developmental delays, and others.

Racist policies and practices have contributed to racial economic inequities. Nationally, Black, Indigenous, and people of color experience poverty at higher rates than white Americans, on average.

The District's Response

Boosting assistance programs that provide temporary cash and health benefits to help low-income residents meet their basic needs, including Medicaid, TANF For District Families, SNAP, etc.

Housing assistance and employment and career training programs to support resident’s housing and employment security. These include the Emergency Rental Assistance Program, Permanent Supportive Housing vouchers, Career MAP, the DC Infrastructure Academy, among other programs and services.

Creation of the DC Commission on Poverty to study poverty issues, evaluate poverty reduction initiatives, and make recommendations to the Mayor and the Council.

Lake County, Illinois Demographic Data. Explanation of field attributes: Total Population – The entire population of Lake County. White – Individuals who are of Caucasian race. This is a percent.African American – Individuals who are of African American race. This is a percent.Asian – Individuals who are of Asian race. This is a percent. Hispanic – Individuals who are of Hispanic ethnicity. This is a percent. Does not Speak English- Individuals who speak a language other than English in their household. This is a percent. Under 5 years of age – Individuals who are under 5 years of age. This is a percent. Under 18 years of age – Individuals who are under 18 years of age. This is a percent. 18-64 years of age – Individuals who are between 18 and 64 years of age. This is a percent. 65 years of age and older – Individuals who are 65 years old or older. This is a percent. Male – Individuals who are male in gender. This is a percent. Female – Individuals who are female in gender. This is a percent. High School Degree – Individuals who have obtained a high school degree. This is a percent. Associate Degree – Individuals who have obtained an associate degree. This is a percent. Bachelor’s Degree or Higher – Individuals who have obtained a bachelor’s degree or higher. This is a percent. Utilizes Food Stamps – Households receiving food stamps/ part of SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). This is a percent. Median Household Income - A median household income refers to the income level earned by a given household where half of the homes in the area earn more and half earn less. This is a dollar amount. No High School – Individuals who have not obtained a high school degree. This is a percent. Poverty – Poverty refers to families and people whose income in the past 12 months is below the poverty level. This is a percent.

This report uses 2003 to 2011 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) to assess past year need for and receipt of alcohol use treatment and illicit drug use treatment among African Americans or Blacks aged 12 or older in comparison to persons of other racial and ethnic groups. Results are shown by age group, gender, federal poverty level and insurance coverage status.

A key question in the study of minority representation is whether descriptive representatives provide superior substantive representation. Neglected in this literature is the distinction between two forms of substantive representation: rhetoric versus policy. This paper provides a systematic comparison of presidential minority representation along these two dimensions. Barack Obama was the first African American president, yet his substantive representation of African Americans has not been fully evaluated. Using speech and budget data, we find that relative to comparable presidents, Obama offered weaker rhetorical representation, but stronger policy representation, on race and poverty. While the paper cannot rule out non-racial explanations, Obama’s policy proposals are consistent with minority representation. His actions also suggest that descriptive representatives may provide relatively better policy representation but worse rhetorical representation, at least when the constituency is a numerical minority. This paper thus highlights an understudied tension between rhetoric and policy in theories of minority representation.

County-level race and ethnicity estimates for populations for whom poverty status has been determined, cross-tabulated with income estimates for populations with income below poverty level. Race and ethnicity estimates include the following categories: White alone, Black or African American alone, American Indian or Alaska Native alone, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander alone, Some Other Race alone, Two or More Races, White alone and Not Hispanic or Latino, Hispanic or Latino, and people of color. Estimates are accompanied by margins of error, coefficients of variation, and percentages. Geometry source: 2020 Census. Attribute source: 2019-2023 American Community Survey 5-year estimates, tables B17001, B17001A, B17001B, B17001C, B17001D, B17001E, B17001F, B17001G, B17001H, and B17001I. Date of last data update: 2024-01-11 This is official RLIS data. Contact Person: Joe Gordon joe.gordon@oregonmetro.gov 503-797-1587 RLIS Metadata Viewer: https://gis.oregonmetro.gov/rlis-metadata/#/details/3845 RLIS Terms of Use: https://rlisdiscovery.oregonmetro.gov/pages/terms-of-use

Tabular data of population by age groups, race and gender, and the poverty by race is attached to the split tract geography to create this split tract with population and poverty data. Split tract data is the product of 2020 census tracts split by 2022 incorporated city boundaries and unincorporated community/countywide statistical areas (CSA) boundaries. The census tract boundaries have been altered and aligned where necessary with legal city boundaries and unincorporated areas, including shoreline/coastal areas. Census Tract:Every 10 years the Census Bureau counts the population of the United States as mandated by Constitution. The Census Bureau (https://www.census.gov/) released 2020 geographic boundaries data including census tracts for the analysis and mapping of demographic information across the United States. City Boundary:City Boundary data is the base map information for the County of Los Angeles. These City Boundaries are based on the Los Angeles County Seamless Cadastral Landbase. The Landbase is jointly maintained by the Los Angeles County Assessor and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (DPW). This layer represents current city boundaries within Los Angeles County. The DPW provides the most current shapefiles representing city boundaries and city annexations. True, legal boundaries are only determined on the ground by surveyors licensed in the State of California.Countywide Statistical Areas (CSA): The countywide Statistical Area (CSA) was defined to provide a common geographic boundary for reporting departmental statistics for unincorporated areas and incorporated Los Angeles city to the Board of Supervisors. The CSA boundary and CSA names are established by the CIO and the LA County Enterprise GIS group worked with the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Unincorporated Area and Field Deputies that reflect as best as possible the general name preferences of residents and historical names of areas. This data is primarily focused on broad statistics and reporting, not mapping of communities. This data is not designed to perfectly represent communities, nor jurisdictional boundaries such as Angeles National Forest. CSA represent board approved geographies comprised of Census block groups split by cities.Data Field:CT20: 2020 Census tractFIP22: 2022 City FIP CodeCITY: City name for incorporated cities and “Unincorporated” for unincorporated areas (as of July 1, 2022) CSA: Countywide Statistical Area (CSA) - Unincorporated area community names and LA City neighborhood names.CT20FIP22CSA: 2020 census tract with 2022 city FIPs for incorporated cities and unincorporated areas and LA neighborhoods. SPA22: 2022 Service Planning Area (SPA) number.SPA_NAME: Service Planning Area name.HD22: 2022 Health District (HD) number: HD_NAME: Health District name.POP22_AGE_0_4: 2022 population 0 to 4 years oldPOP22_AGE_5_9: 2022 population 5 to 9 years old POP22_AGE_10_14: 2022 population 10 to 14 years old POP22_AGE_15_17: 2022 population 15 to 17 years old POP22_AGE_18_19: 2022 population 18 to 19 years old POP22_AGE_20_44: 2022 population 20 to 24 years old POP22_AGE_25_29: 2022 population 25 to 29 years old POP22_AGE_30_34: 2022 population 30 to 34 years old POP22_AGE_35_44: 2022 population 35 to 44 years old POP22_AGE_45_54: 2022 population 45 to 54 years old POP22_AGE_55_64: 2022 population 55 to 64 years old POP22_AGE_65_74: 2022 population 65 to 74 years old POP22_AGE_75_84: 2022 population 75 to 84 years old POP22_AGE_85_100: 2022 population 85 years and older POP22_WHITE: 2022 Non-Hispanic White POP22_BLACK: 2022 Non-Hispanic African AmericanPOP22_AIAN: 2022 Non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska NativePOP22_ASIAN: 2022 Non-Hispanic Asian POP22_HNPI: 2022 Non-Hispanic Hawaiian Native or Pacific IslanderPOP22_HISPANIC: 2022 HispanicPOP22_MALE: 2022 Male POP22_FEMALE: 2022 Female POV22_WHITE: 2022 Non-Hispanic White below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_BLACK: 2022 Non-Hispanic African American below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_AIAN: 2022 Non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_ASIAN: 2022 Non-Hispanic Asian below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_HNPI: 2022 Non-Hispanic Hawaiian Native or Pacific Islander below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_HISPANIC: 2022 Hispanic below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_TOTAL: 2022 Total population below 100% Federal Poverty Level POP22_TOTAL: 2022 Total PopulationAREA_SQMil: Area in square mile.POP22_DENSITY: Population per square mile.POV22_PERCENT: Poverty rate/percentage.How this data created?The tabular data of population by age groups, by ethnic groups and by gender, and the poverty by ethnic groups is attributed to the split tract geography to create this data. Split tract polygon data is created by intersecting 2020 census tract polygons, LA Country City Boundary polygons and Countywide Statistical Areas (CSA) polygon data. The resulting polygon boundary aligned and matched with the legal city boundary whenever possible. Note:1. Population and poverty data estimated as of July 1, 2022. 2. 2010 Census tract and 2020 census tracts are not the same. Similarly, city and community boundary are not the same because boundary is reviewed and updated annually.

A statistical method called a dissimilarity index was used to quantify how segregated the region is among its census tracts, first by race and ethnicity, and then by income. The indices use decennial census tract data for years 1990 and 2000. The U.S. Census Bureau’s American Communities Survey (ACS) five-year period estimates. The Racial/Ethnic Segregation Index is an indicator of how segregated the region's census tracts are, relative to the regional distribution of white, non-Latinx population and people of color and Latinx populations. In a given year, values show dissimilarity in the racial and ethnic makeup of tracts across the region, and demonstrates the percentage of the population that would, theoretically, need to relocate in order to match the region's racial and ethnic makeup. The higher the index value, the higher the segregation is among white, non-Latinx and other races/ethnicities. The Income Segregation Index is an indicator of how segregated the region's census tracts are by income, relative to the regional distribution of low-income households. Low-income is defined as households below 200% of the federal poverty rate. This index shows dissimilarity in income for census tracts across the region for each year displayed, and demonstrates what percentage of the population would need to relocate to another census tract in order to match the income distribution for the entire region. The higher the index value, the greater the geographic concentration of wealth or poverty.

This report uses 2003 to 2011 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) to assess past year need for and receipt of alcohol use treatment and illicit drug use treatment among Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders aged 12 or older in comparison to persons of other racial and ethnic groups. Results are shown by age group, gender, federal poverty level and health insurance coverage status.

Descriptive statistics of residential (high-poverty) trajectories by race and cohort.

In 2025, nearly 11.7 percent of the world population in extreme poverty, with the poverty threshold at 2.15 U.S. dollars a day, lived in Nigeria. Moreover, the Democratic Republic of the Congo accounted for around 11.7 percent of the global population in extreme poverty. Other African nations with a large poor population were Tanzania, Mozambique, and Madagascar. Poverty levels remain high despite the forecast decline Poverty is a widespread issue across Africa. Around 429 million people on the continent were living below the extreme poverty line of 2.15 U.S. dollars a day in 2024. Since the continent had approximately 1.4 billion inhabitants, roughly a third of Africa’s population was in extreme poverty that year. Mozambique, Malawi, Central African Republic, and Niger had Africa’s highest extreme poverty rates based on the 2.15 U.S. dollars per day extreme poverty indicator (updated from 1.90 U.S. dollars in September 2022). Although the levels of poverty on the continent are forecast to decrease in the coming years, Africa will remain the poorest region compared to the rest of the world. Prevalence of poverty and malnutrition across Africa Multiple factors are linked to increased poverty. Regions with critical situations of employment, education, health, nutrition, war, and conflict usually have larger poor populations. Consequently, poverty tends to be more prevalent in least-developed and developing countries worldwide. For similar reasons, rural households also face higher poverty levels. In 2024, the extreme poverty rate in Africa stood at around 45 percent among the rural population, compared to seven percent in urban areas. Together with poverty, malnutrition is also widespread in Africa. Limited access to food leads to low health conditions, increasing the poverty risk. At the same time, poverty can determine inadequate nutrition. Almost 38.3 percent of the global undernourished population lived in Africa in 2022.

In the field of American state politics, the tension between majoritarian institutions and equality has largely been ignored. Do state institutions that empower majority preferences exacerbate disparities in social outcomes? Under what conditions do majoritarian institutions exacerbate inequalities in the American states? Our argument is that equality is most likely to be threatened under majoritarian institutions when (1) there are systemic participatory biases and/or (2) there are widespread prejudices about particular groups in society. We find that more majoritarian institutions are associated with larger disparities between white and black life expectancy and poverty rates across the American states, but not differences in educational attainment. We also find that this effect is moderated by racial context, with majoritarian institutions being associated with greater disparities for states with diverse racial contexts and smaller disparities in more homogenous states. These findings suggest that majoritarian institutions operate to the benefit of the white majority, while coming at the cost of minority population outcomes when a racial threat is perceived, and presumably, public opinion is biased.

This report uses 2003 to 2011 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) to assess past year need for and receipt of alcohol use treatment and illicit drug use treatment among American Indian or Alaska Natives aged 12 or older in comparison to persons of other racial and ethnic groups. Results are shown by age group, gender, federal poverty level and rural/urban status.

description: The 2006-2010 ACS 5-Year Selected Population Tables (SPT) use ACS data aggregated over a 5-year period to provide more reliable estimates of detailed social, economic, and housing characteristics for many race, tribal, Hispanic, and ancestry population groups at multiple levels of geography. Detailed tables on topics such as educational attainment, fertility, nativity, citizenship, income, poverty, and homeownership are iterated for many racial and ethnic population groups. For the SPT, detailed tables are presented for up to 392 population groups in geographies down to the tract level where population thresholds were met.; abstract: The 2006-2010 ACS 5-Year Selected Population Tables (SPT) use ACS data aggregated over a 5-year period to provide more reliable estimates of detailed social, economic, and housing characteristics for many race, tribal, Hispanic, and ancestry population groups at multiple levels of geography. Detailed tables on topics such as educational attainment, fertility, nativity, citizenship, income, poverty, and homeownership are iterated for many racial and ethnic population groups. For the SPT, detailed tables are presented for up to 392 population groups in geographies down to the tract level where population thresholds were met.

The Bureau of the Census has released Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF1) 100-Percent data. The file includes the following population items: sex, age, race, Hispanic or Latino origin, household relationship, and household and family characteristics. Housing items include occupancy status and tenure (whether the unit is owner or renter occupied). SF1 does not include information on incomes, poverty status, overcrowded housing or age of housing. These topics will be covered in Summary File 3. Data are available for states, counties, county subdivisions, places, census tracts, block groups, and, where applicable, American Indian and Alaskan Native Areas and Hawaiian Home Lands. The SF1 data are available on the Bureau's web site and may be retrieved from American FactFinder as tables, lists, or maps. Users may also download a set of compressed ASCII files for each state via the Bureau's FTP server. There are over 8000 data items available for each geographic area. The full listing of these data items is available here as a downloadable compressed data base file named TABLES.ZIP. The uncompressed is in FoxPro data base file (dbf) format and may be imported to ACCESS, EXCEL, and other software formats. While all of this information is useful, the Office of Community Planning and Development has downloaded selected information for all states and areas and is making this information available on the CPD web pages. The tables and data items selected are those items used in the CDBG and HOME allocation formulas plus topics most pertinent to the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), the Consolidated Plan, and similar overall economic and community development plans. The information is contained in five compressed (zipped) dbf tables for each state. When uncompressed the tables are ready for use with FoxPro and they can be imported into ACCESS, EXCEL, and other spreadsheet, GIS and database software. The data are at the block group summary level. The first two characters of the file name are the state abbreviation. The next two letters are BG for block group. Each record is labeled with the code and name of the city and county in which it is located so that the data can be summarized to higher-level geography. The last part of the file name describes the contents . The GEO file contains standard Census Bureau geographic identifiers for each block group, such as the metropolitan area code and congressional district code. The only data included in this table is total population and total housing units. POP1 and POP2 contain selected population variables and selected housing items are in the HU file. The MA05 table data is only for use by State CDBG grantees for the reporting of the racial composition of beneficiaries of Area Benefit activities. The complete package for a state consists of the dictionary file named TABLES, and the five data files for the state. The logical record number (LOGRECNO) links the records across tables.

Social vulnerability is defined as the disproportionate susceptibility of some social groups to the impacts of hazards, including death, injury, loss, or disruption of livelihood. In this dataset from Climate Ready Boston, groups identified as being more vulnerable are older adults, children, people of color, people with limited English proficiency, people with low or no incomes, people with disabilities, and people with medical illnesses. Source:The analysis and definitions used in Climate Ready Boston (2016) are based on "A framework to understand the relationship between social factors that reduce resilience in cities: Application to the City of Boston." Published 2015 in the International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction by Atyia Martin, Northeastern University.Population Definitions:Older Adults:Older adults (those over age 65) have physical vulnerabilities in a climate event; they suffer from higher rates of medical illness than the rest of the population and can have some functional limitations in an evacuation scenario, as well as when preparing for and recovering from a disaster. Furthermore, older adults are physically more vulnerable to the impacts of extreme heat. Beyond the physical risk, older adults are more likely to be socially isolated. Without an appropriate support network, an initially small risk could be exacerbated if an older adult is not able to get help.Data source: 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates (ACS) data by census tract for population over 65 years of age.Attribute label: OlderAdultChildren: Families with children require additional resources in a climate event. When school is cancelled, parents need alternative childcare options, which can mean missing work. Children are especially vulnerable to extreme heat and stress following a natural disaster.Data source: 2010 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates (ACS) data by census tract for population under 5 years of age.Attribute label: TotChildPeople of Color: People of color make up a majority (53 percent) of Boston’s population. People of color are more likely to fall into multiple vulnerable groups aswell. People of color statistically have lower levels of income and higher levels of poverty than the population at large. People of color, many of whom also have limited English proficiency, may not have ready access in their primary language to information about the dangers of extreme heat or about cooling center resources. This risk to extreme heat can be compounded by the fact that people of color often live in more densely populated urban areas that are at higher risk for heat exposure due to the urban heat island effect.Data source: 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates (ACS) data by census tract: Black, Native American, Asian, Island, Other, Multi, Non-white Hispanics.Attribute label: POC2Limited English Proficiency: Without adequate English skills, residents can miss crucial information on how to preparefor hazards. Cultural practices for information sharing, for example, may focus on word-of-mouth communication. In a flood event, residents can also face challenges communicating with emergency response personnel. If residents are more sociallyisolated, they may be less likely to hear about upcoming events. Finally, immigrants, especially ones who are undocumented, may be reluctant to use government services out of fear of deportation or general distrust of the government or emergency personnel.Data Source: 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates (ACS) data by census tract, defined as speaks English only or speaks English “very well”.Attribute label: LEPLow to no Income: A lack of financial resources impacts a household’s ability to prepare for a disaster event and to support friends and neighborhoods. For example, residents without televisions, computers, or data-driven mobile phones may face challenges getting news about hazards or recovery resources. Renters may have trouble finding and paying deposits for replacement housing if their residence is impacted by flooding. Homeowners may be less able to afford insurance that will cover flood damage. Having low or no income can create difficulty evacuating in a disaster event because of a higher reliance on public transportation. If unable to evacuate, residents may be more at risk without supplies to stay in their homes for an extended period of time. Low- and no-income residents can also be more vulnerable to hot weather if running air conditioning or fans puts utility costs out of reach.Data source: 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates (ACS) data by census tract for low-to- no income populations. The data represents a calculated field that combines people who were 100% below the poverty level and those who were 100–149% of the poverty level.Attribute label: Low_to_NoPeople with Disabilities: People with disabilities are among the most vulnerable in an emergency; they sustain disproportionate rates of illness, injury, and death in disaster events.46 People with disabilities can find it difficult to adequately prepare for a disaster event, including moving to a safer place. They are more likely to be left behind or abandoned during evacuations. Rescue and relief resources—like emergency transportation or shelters, for example— may not be universally accessible. Research has revealed a historic pattern of discrimination against people with disabilities in times of resource scarcity, like after a major storm and flood.Data source: 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates (ACS) data by census tract for total civilian non-institutionalized population, including: hearing difficulty, vision difficulty, cognitive difficulty, ambulatory difficulty, self-care difficulty, and independent living difficulty. Attribute label: TotDisMedical Illness: Symptoms of existing medical illnesses are often exacerbated by hot temperatures. For example, heat can trigger asthma attacks or increase already high blood pressure due to the stress of high temperatures put on the body. Climate events can interrupt access to normal sources of healthcare and even life-sustaining medication. Special planning is required for people experiencing medical illness. For example, people dependent on dialysis will have different evacuation and care needs than other Boston residents in a climate event.Data source: Medical illness is a proxy measure which is based on EASI data accessed through Simply Map. Health data at the local level in Massachusetts is not available beyond zip codes. EASI modeled the health statistics for the U.S. population based upon age, sex, and race probabilities using U.S. Census Bureau data. The probabilities are modeled against the census and current year and five year forecasts. Medical illness is the sum of asthma in children, asthma in adults, heart disease, emphysema, bronchitis, cancer, diabetes, kidney disease, and liver disease. A limitation is that these numbers may be over-counted as the result of people potentially having more than one medical illness. Therefore, the analysis may have greater numbers of people with medical illness within census tracts than actually present. Overall, the analysis was based on the relationship between social factors.Attribute label: MedIllnesOther attribute definitions:GEOID10: Geographic identifier: State Code (25), Country Code (025), 2010 Census TractAREA_SQFT: Tract area (in square feet)AREA_ACRES: Tract area (in acres)POP100_RE: Tract population countHU100_RE: Tract housing unit countName: Boston Neighborhood