The benchmark interest rate in the United States was last recorded at 4.50 percent. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - United States Fed Funds Rate - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.

Fixed 30-year mortgage rates in the United States averaged 6.84 percent in the week ending July 18 of 2025. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - United States MBA 30-Yr Mortgage Rate - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.

30 Year Mortgage Rate in the United States increased to 6.75 percent in July 17 from 6.72 percent in the previous week. This dataset includes a chart with historical data for the United States 30 Year Mortgage Rate.

In the Annual Budget Document, the Budget Office presents information about the annual cost of various city services/fees for the typical ratepayer. These services and fees include Austin Energy, Austin Water, Austin Resource Recovery, the Clean Community Fee, the Transportation User Fee, the Drainage Utility Fee, and the Property Tax Bill. This dataset supports the SD23 measure, "Dollar amount and percentage increase of major rates and fees for a range of customer types" (EOA.C.5.c). It contains the approved and amended rates for the typical ratepayer, the annual dollar change, and the annual percent change for each service/fee. This dataset can be used to help understand the cost of city services over time. View more details and insights related to this dataset on the story page: https://data.austintexas.gov/stories/s/Dollar-Amount-and-Percentage-Increase-of-Major-Rat/56uv-46qi/

Dataset

This dataset was created by @data is life

Released under Apache 2.0

Contents

The benchmark interest rate in Japan was last recorded at 0.50 percent. This dataset provides - Japan Interest Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

Updates

• Notice of data discontinuation: Since the start of the pandemic, AP has reported case and death counts from data provided by Johns Hopkins University. Johns Hopkins University has announced that they will stop their daily data collection efforts after March 10. As Johns Hopkins stops providing data, the AP will also stop collecting daily numbers for COVID cases and deaths. The HHS and CDC now collect and visualize key metrics for the pandemic. AP advises using those resources when reporting on the pandemic going forward.

  • CDC Weekly case and death counts (national and state level)
  • CDC County level cases and deaths
  • HHS New hospital admissions
  • CDC NowCast COVID variant proportions (national and regional level)

• April 9, 2020

  • The population estimate data for New York County, NY has been updated to include all five New York City counties (Kings County, Queens County, Bronx County, Richmond County and New York County). This has been done to match the Johns Hopkins COVID-19 data, which aggregates counts for the five New York City counties to New York County.

• April 20, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins death totals in the US now include confirmed and probable deaths in accordance with CDC guidelines as of April 14. One significant result of this change was an increase of more than 3,700 deaths in the New York City count. This change will likely result in increases for death counts elsewhere as well. The AP does not alter the Johns Hopkins source data, so probable deaths are included in this dataset as well.

• April 29, 2020

  • The AP is now providing timeseries data for counts of COVID-19 cases and deaths. The raw counts are provided here unaltered, along with a population column with Census ACS-5 estimates and calculated daily case and death rates per 100,000 people. Please read the updated caveats section for more information.

• September 1st, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins is now providing counts for the five New York City counties individually.

• February 12, 2021

  • The Ohio Department of Health recently announced that as many as 4,000 COVID-19 deaths may have been underreported through the state’s reporting system, and that the "daily reported death counts will be high for a two to three-day period."
  • Because deaths data will be anomalous for consecutive days, we have chosen to freeze Ohio's rolling average for daily deaths at the last valid measure until Johns Hopkins is able to back-distribute the data. The raw daily death counts, as reported by Johns Hopkins and including the backlogged death data, will still be present in the new_deaths column.

• February 16, 2021

  - Johns Hopkins has reconciled Ohio's historical deaths data with the state.

  Overview

The AP is using data collected by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering as our source for outbreak caseloads and death counts for the United States and globally.

The Hopkins data is available at the county level in the United States. The AP has paired this data with population figures and county rural/urban designations, and has calculated caseload and death rates per 100,000 people. Be aware that caseloads may reflect the availability of tests -- and the ability to turn around test results quickly -- rather than actual disease spread or true infection rates.

This data is from the Hopkins dashboard that is updated regularly throughout the day. Like all organizations dealing with data, Hopkins is constantly refining and cleaning up their feed, so there may be brief moments where data does not appear correctly. At this link, you’ll find the Hopkins daily data reports, and a clean version of their feed.

The AP is updating this dataset hourly at 45 minutes past the hour.

To learn more about AP's data journalism capabilities for publishers, corporations and financial institutions, go here or email kromano@ap.org.

Queries

Use AP's queries to filter the data or to join to other datasets we've made available to help cover the coronavirus pandemic

• Filter cases by state here

• Rank states by their status as current hotspots. Calculates the 7-day rolling average of new cases per capita in each state: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=481e82a4-1b2f-41c2-9ea1-d91aa4b3b1ac

• Find recent hotspots within your state by running a query to calculate the 7-day rolling average of new cases by capita in each county: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=b566f1db-3231-40fe-8099-311909b7b687&showTemplatePreview=true

• Join county-level case data to an earlier dataset released by AP on local hospital capacity here. To find out more about the hospital capacity dataset, see the full details.

• Pull the 100 counties with the highest per-capita confirmed cases here

• Rank all the counties by the highest per-capita rate of new cases in the past 7 days here. Be aware that because this ranks per-capita caseloads, very small counties may rise to the very top, so take into account raw caseload figures as well.

Interactive

The AP has designed an interactive map to track COVID-19 cases reported by Johns Hopkins.

@(https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/15/)

Interactive Embed Code

<iframe title="USA counties (2018) choropleth map Mapping COVID-19 cases by county" aria-describedby="" id="datawrapper-chart-nRyaf" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/10/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important;" height="400"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">(function() {'use strict';window.addEventListener('message', function(event) {if (typeof event.data['datawrapper-height'] !== 'undefined') {for (var chartId in event.data['datawrapper-height']) {var iframe = document.getElementById('datawrapper-chart-' + chartId) || document.querySelector("iframe[src*='" + chartId + "']");if (!iframe) {continue;}iframe.style.height = event.data['datawrapper-height'][chartId] + 'px';}}});})();</script>

Caveats

• This data represents the number of cases and deaths reported by each state and has been collected by Johns Hopkins from a number of sources cited on their website.
• In some cases, deaths or cases of people who've crossed state lines -- either to receive treatment or because they became sick and couldn't return home while traveling -- are reported in a state they aren't currently in, because of state reporting rules.
• In some states, there are a number of cases not assigned to a specific county -- for those cases, the county name is "unassigned to a single county"
• This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University's COVID-19 tracking project. The AP is simply making it available here for ease of use for reporters and members.
• Caseloads may reflect the availability of tests -- and the ability to turn around test results quickly -- rather than actual disease spread or true infection rates.
• Population estimates at the county level are drawn from 2014-18 5-year estimates from the American Community Survey.
• The Urban/Rural classification scheme is from the Center for Disease Control and Preventions's National Center for Health Statistics. It puts each county into one of six categories -- from Large Central Metro to Non-Core -- according to population and other characteristics. More details about the classifications can be found here.

Johns Hopkins timeseries data - Johns Hopkins pulls data regularly to update their dashboard. Once a day, around 8pm EDT, Johns Hopkins adds the counts for all areas they cover to the timeseries file. These counts are snapshots of the latest cumulative counts provided by the source on that day. This can lead to inconsistencies if a source updates their historical data for accuracy, either increasing or decreasing the latest cumulative count. - Johns Hopkins periodically edits their historical timeseries data for accuracy. They provide a file documenting all errors in their timeseries files that they have identified and fixed here

Attribution

This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University COVID-19 tracking project

Population by sex, annual rate of population increase, surface area and density

Context

This dataset was actually made to check the correlations between a housing price index and its crime rate. Rise and fall of housing prices can be due to various factors with obvious reasons being the facilities of the house and its neighborhood. Think of a place like Detroit where there are hoodlums and you don't want to end up buying a house in the wrong place. This data set will serve as historical data for crime rate data and this in turn can be used to predict whether the housing price will rise or fall. Rise in housing price will suggest decrease in crime rate over the years and vice versa.

Content

The headers are self explanatory. index_nsa is the housing price non seasonal index.

Acknowledgements

Thank you to my team who helped in achieving this.

Inspiration

https://www.kaggle.com/marshallproject/crime-rates https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/fhfa-house-price-indexes-hpis Data was collected from these 2 sources and merged to get the resulting dataset.

Dataset from Immigration and Checkpoints Authority. For more information, visit https://data.gov.sg/datasets/d_b1516a82d21dc594ad5a93cc341a234c/view

Graph and download economic data for Personal Saving Rate (PSAVERT) from Jan 1959 to May 2025 about savings, personal, rate, and USA.

This dataset contains data on natural increase rate of population (per 1000 population) in Latvia in 1919-1939. Data in the cells (year by administrative region) were computed by multiplying the number of natural increase of population by 1000 and dividing by number of the mid-year population. For sources of the data see metadata field Origin of Sources below. Dataset "Rate of Natural Increase of Population (per 1000 Population) in Latvia, 1919-1939" was published implementing project "Historical Sociology of Modern Restorations: a Cross-Time Comparative Study of Post-Communist Transformation in the Baltic States" from 2018 to 2022. Project leader is prof. Zenonas Norkus. Project is funded by the European Social Fund according to the activity "Improvement of researchers' qualification by implementing world-class R&D projects' of Measure No. 09.3.3-LMT-K-712".

Note: Find data at source. ・ Federal and state decarbonization goals have led to numerous financial incentives and policies designed to increase access and adoption of renewable energy systems. In combination with the declining cost of both solar photovoltaic and battery energy storage systems and rising electric utility rates, residential renewable adoption has become more favorable than ever. However, not all states provide the same opportunity for cost recovery, and the complicated and changing policy and utility landscape can make it difficult for households to make an informed decision on whether to install a renewable system. This paper is intended to provide a guide to households considering renewable adoption by introducing relevant factors that influence renewable system performance and payback, summarized in a state lookup table for quick reference. Five states are chosen as case studies to perform economic optimizations based on net metering policy, utility rate structure, and average electric utility price; these states are selected to be representative of the possible combinations of factors to aid in the decision-making process for customers in all states. The results of this analysis highlight the dual importance of both state support for renewables and price signals, as the benefits of residential renewable systems are best realized in states with net metering policies facing the challenge of above-average electric utility rates.This dataset is intended to allow readers to reproduce and customize the analysis performed in this work to their benefit. Suggested modifications include: location, household load profile, rate tariff structure, and renewable energy system design.

The dataset shows rates of natural increase in the United Arab Emirates from 1997 to 2015.

Few paired lake-watershed studies examine long term effects of climate on the ecosystem function of lakes in a hydrological context. We use thirty-two years of hydrological and biogeochemical data from a high-elevation site in the Sierra Nevada of California to characterize variation in snowmelt in relation to climate variability, and explore the impact on factors affecting phytoplankton biomass. The magnitude of accumulated winter snow, quantified through basin-wide estimates of snow water equivalent (SWE), was the most important climate factor controlling variation in the timing and rate of spring snowmelt. Variations in SWE and snowmelt led to significant differences in lake flushing rate, water temperature, and nitrate concentrations across years. On average in dry years, snowmelt started 25 days earlier and proceeded 7 mm/d slower, and the lake began the ice-free season with nitrate concentrations ~2 uM higher and water temperatures 9 C warmer than in wet years. Flushing rates in wet years were 2.5 times larger than dry years. Consequently, particulate organic matter concentrations, a proxy for phytoplankton biomass, were 5 – 6 uM higher in dry years. There was a temporal trend of increase in particulate organic matter across dry years that corresponded to lake warming independent of variation in SWE. These results suggest that phytoplankton biomass is increasing as a result of both interannual variability in precipitation and long term warming trends. Our study underscores the need to account for local-scale catchment variability that may affect the accumulation of winter snowpack when predicting climate responses in lakes.

As of 2023, approximately 2.4% of American Airlines' flights were canceled, according to data from the U.S. Department of Transportation. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) This rate reflects a variety of operational challenges, including weather, staffing, and air traffic control restrictions. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) Compared to its competitors, American ranks somewhere in the middle—not the best, but not the worst.

Over 200,000 scheduled flights take off annually under the American Airlines brand, and even a 2.4% cancellation rate means thousands of flights are affected. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) These disruptions can leave travelers scrambling for alternatives or stuck in airports. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) The cancellation rate becomes especially relevant during peak seasons and holidays.

On average, the cancellation rate increases to 4%–6% during major weather events or holidays like Thanksgiving and Christmas. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) That means during these times, the chance of being affected nearly doubles. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) Always plan accordingly by having backup options and checking forecasts ahead of time.

The causes of cancellations fall under two categories: controllable and uncontrollable. In American’s case, about 60% of cancellations are due to controllable factors like crew scheduling. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) That’s why the airline may be responsible for accommodations or rebooking in such cases. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) Uncontrollable causes, like bad weather, usually don’t require reimbursement.

American Airlines' main hubs—such as Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW), Charlotte (CLT), and Chicago O'Hare (ORD)—experience higher rates of cancellations due to operational complexity. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) These high-traffic hubs are also more sensitive to ripple effects caused by a single cancellation. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) Monitor your departure and connection airports before flying.

Statistics also show that early morning flights (before 9 AM) have a slightly lower cancellation rate. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) As the day progresses, delays and cancellations tend to increase, mostly due to cascading logistical challenges. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) Booking early can be a strategic move to avoid problems.

American Airlines publishes performance metrics monthly, which include on-time performance and cancellation rates. In August 2023, the airline saw a temporary spike with 3.1% cancellations. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) This was largely due to nationwide weather issues and increased summer travel demand. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) It's helpful to look at these trends before booking.

FlightAware, a real-time flight tracking service, often reports higher cancellation rates on busy travel days. On Memorial Day weekend, American had over 650 canceled flights nationwide. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) When the system is stressed, airline performance typically suffers. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) Consider flexibility in your travel schedule for such times.

Despite its cancellations, American has improved operational resilience in recent years. In 2021, the cancellation rate was over 5.5%, which has now been nearly cut in half. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) That suggests investment in technology, staffing, and better coordination is paying off. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) Still, no airline is immune to problems.

If your flight is canceled, American typically offers rebooking on the next available flight or a full refund if you choose not to travel. ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) Call ☎️+1.(888)+800-9117 (US) or +44.(203)+900-0080(UK) to request compensation or assistance from an agent. This line provides direct help with disrupted travel plans.

Context

An education company named X Education sells online courses to industry professionals. On any given day, many professionals who are interested in the courses land on their website and browse for courses.

The company markets its courses on several websites and search engines like Google. Once these people land on the website, they might browse the courses or fill up a form for the course or watch some videos. When these people fill up a form providing their email address or phone number, they are classified to be a lead. Moreover, the company also gets leads through past referrals. Once these leads are acquired, employees from the sales team start making calls, writing emails, etc. Through this process, some of the leads get converted while most do not. The typical lead conversion rate at X education is around 30%.

Now, although X Education gets a lot of leads, its lead conversion rate is very poor. For example, if, say, they acquire 100 leads in a day, only about 30 of them are converted. To make this process more efficient, the company wishes to identify the most potential leads, also known as ‘Hot Leads’. If they successfully identify this set of leads, the lead conversion rate should go up as the sales team will now be focusing more on communicating with the potential leads rather than making calls to everyone.

There are a lot of leads generated in the initial stage (top) but only a few of them come out as paying customers from the bottom. In the middle stage, you need to nurture the potential leads well (i.e. educating the leads about the product, constantly communicating, etc. ) in order to get a higher lead conversion.

X Education wants to select the most promising leads, i.e. the leads that are most likely to convert into paying customers. The company requires you to build a model wherein you need to assign a lead score to each of the leads such that the customers with higher lead score h have a higher conversion chance and the customers with lower lead score have a lower conversion chance. The CEO, in particular, has given a ballpark of the target lead conversion rate to be around 80%.

Content

Variables Description * Prospect ID - A unique ID with which the customer is identified. * Lead Number - A lead number assigned to each lead procured. * Lead Origin - The origin identifier with which the customer was identified to be a lead. Includes API, Landing Page Submission, etc. * Lead Source - The source of the lead. Includes Google, Organic Search, Olark Chat, etc. * Do Not Email -An indicator variable selected by the customer wherein they select whether of not they want to be emailed about the course or not. * Do Not Call - An indicator variable selected by the customer wherein they select whether of not they want to be called about the course or not. * Converted - The target variable. Indicates whether a lead has been successfully converted or not. * TotalVisits - The total number of visits made by the customer on the website. * Total Time Spent on Website - The total time spent by the customer on the website. * Page Views Per Visit - Average number of pages on the website viewed during the visits. * Last Activity - Last activity performed by the customer. Includes Email Opened, Olark Chat Conversation, etc. * Country - The country of the customer. * Specialization - The industry domain in which the customer worked before. Includes the level 'Select Specialization' which means the customer had not selected this option while filling the form. * How did you hear about X Education - The source from which the customer heard about X Education. * What is your current occupation - Indicates whether the customer is a student, umemployed or employed. * What matters most to you in choosing this course An option selected by the customer - indicating what is their main motto behind doing this course. * Search - Indicating whether the customer had seen the ad in any of the listed items. * Magazine
* Newspaper Article * X Education Forums
* Newspaper * Digital Advertisement * Through Recommendations - Indicates whether the customer came in through recommendations. * Receive More Updates About Our Courses - Indicates whether the customer chose to receive more updates about the courses. * Tags - Tags assigned to customers indicating the current status of the lead. * Lead Quality - Indicates the quality of lead based on the data and intuition the employee who has been assigned to the lead. * Update me on Supply Chain Content - Indicates whether the customer wants updates on the Supply Chain Content. * Get updates on DM Content - Indicates whether the customer wants updates on the DM Content. * Lead Profile - A lead level assigned to each customer based on their profile. * City - The city of the customer. * Asymmetric Activity Index - An index and score assigned to each customer based on their activity and their profile * Asymmetric Profile Index * Asymmetric Activity Score * Asymmetric Profile Score
* I agree to pay the amount through cheque - Indicates whether the customer has agreed to pay the amount through cheque or not. * a free copy of Mastering The Interview - Indicates whether the customer wants a free copy of 'Mastering the Interview' or not. * Last Notable Activity - The last notable activity performed by the student.

Acknowledgements

UpGrad Case Study

Inspiration

Your data will be in front of the world's largest data science community. What questions do you want to see answered?

FIREXAQ_jValue_AircraftInSitu_N48_Data are in situ photolysis rate (j value) data collected onboard the NOAA-CHEM Twin Otter aircraft during FIREX-AQ. Data collection for this product is complete.Completed during summer 2019, FIREX-AQ utilized a combination of instrumented airplanes, satellites, and ground-based instrumentation. Detailed fire plume sampling was carried out by the NASA DC-8 aircraft, which had a comprehensive instrument payload capable of measuring over 200 trace gas species, as well as aerosol microphysical, optical, and chemical properties. The DC-8 aircraft completed 23 science flights, including 15 flights from Boise, Idaho and 8 flights from Salina, Kansas. NASA’s ER-2 completed 11 flights, partially in support of the FIREX-AQ effort. The ER-2 payload was made up of 8 satellite analog instruments and provided critical fire information, including fire temperature, fire plume heights, and vegetation/soil albedo information. NOAA provided the NOAA-CHEM Twin Otter and the NOAA-MET Twin Otter aircraft to measure chemical processing in the lofted plumes of Western wildfires. The NOAA-CHEM Twin Otter focused on nighttime plume chemistry, from which data is archived at the NASA Atmospheric Science Data Center (ASDC). The NOAA-MET Twin Otter collected measurements of air movements at fire boundaries with the goal of understanding the local weather impacts of fires and the movement patterns of fires. NOAA-MET Twin Otter data will be archived at the ASDC in the future. Additionally, a ground-based station in McCall, Idaho and several mobile laboratories provided in-situ measurements of aerosol microphysical and optical properties, aerosol chemical compositions, and trace gas species. The Fire Influence on Regional to Global Environments and Air Quality (FIREX-AQ) campaign was a NOAA/NASA interagency intensive study of North American fires to gain an understanding on the integrated impact of the fire emissions on the tropospheric chemistry and composition and to assess the satellite’s capability for detecting fires and estimating fire emissions. The overarching goal of FIREX-AQ was to provide measurements of trace gas and aerosol emissions for wildfires and prescribed fires in great detail, relate them to fuel and fire conditions at the point of emission, characterize the conditions relating to plume rise, and follow plumes downwind to understand chemical transformation and air quality impacts.

Reporting of new Aggregate Case and Death Count data was discontinued May 11, 2023, with the expiration of the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration. This dataset will receive a final update on June 1, 2023, to reconcile historical data through May 10, 2023, and will remain publicly available.

Aggregate Data Collection Process Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, data have been gathered through a robust process with the following steps:

• A CDC data team reviews and validates the information obtained from jurisdictions’ state and local websites via an overnight data review process.
• If more than one official county data source exists, CDC uses a comprehensive data selection process comparing each official county data source, and takes the highest case and death counts respectively, unless otherwise specified by the state.
• CDC compiles these data and posts the finalized information on COVID Data Tracker.
• County level data is aggregated to obtain state and territory specific totals.

This process is collaborative, with CDC and jurisdictions working together to ensure the accuracy of COVID-19 case and death numbers. County counts provide the most up-to-date numbers on cases and deaths by report date. CDC may retrospectively update counts to correct data quality issues.

Methodology Changes Several differences exist between the current, weekly-updated dataset and the archived version:

• Source: The current Weekly-Updated Version is based on county-level aggregate count data, while the Archived Version is based on State-level aggregate count data.
• Confirmed/Probable Cases/Death breakdown:  While the probable cases and deaths are included in the total case and total death counts in both versions (if applicable), they were reported separately from the confirmed cases and deaths by jurisdiction in the Archived Version.  In the current Weekly-Updated Version, the counts by jurisdiction are not reported by confirmed or probable status (See Confirmed and Probable Counts section for more detail).
• Time Series Frequency: The current Weekly-Updated Version contains weekly time series data (i.e., one record per week per jurisdiction), while the Archived Version contains daily time series data (i.e., one record per day per jurisdiction).
• Update Frequency: The current Weekly-Updated Version is updated weekly, while the Archived Version was updated twice daily up to October 20, 2022.

Important note: The counts reflected during a given time period in this dataset may not match the counts reflected for the same time period in the archived dataset noted above. Discrepancies may exist due to differences between county and state COVID-19 case surveillance and reconciliation efforts.

Confirmed and Probable Counts In this dataset, counts by jurisdiction are not displayed by confirmed or probable status. Instead, confirmed and probable cases and deaths are included in the Total Cases and Total Deaths columns, when available. Not all jurisdictions report probable cases and deaths to CDC.* Confirmed and probable case definition criteria are described here:

Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (ymaws.com).

Deaths CDC reports death data on other sections of the website: CDC COVID Data Tracker: Home, CDC COVID Data Tracker: Cases, Deaths, and Testing, and NCHS Provisional Death Counts. Information presented on the COVID Data Tracker pages is based on the same source (total case counts) as the present dataset; however, NCHS Death Counts are based on death certificates that use information reported by physicians, medical examiners, or coroners in the cause-of-death section of each certificate. Data from each of these pages are considered provisional (not complete and pending verification) and are therefore subject to change. Counts from previous weeks are continually revised as more records are received and processed.

Number of Jurisdictions Reporting There are currently 60 public health jurisdictions reporting cases of COVID-19. This includes the 50 states, the District of Columbia, New York City, the U.S. territories of American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S Virgin Islands as well as three independent countries in compacts of free association with the United States, Federated States of Micronesia, Republic of the Marshall Islands, and Republic of Palau. New York State’s reported case and death counts do not include New York City’s counts as they separately report nationally notifiable conditions to CDC.

CDC COVID-19 data are available to the public as summary or aggregate count files, including total counts of cases and deaths, available by state and by county. These and other data on COVID-19 are available from multiple public locations, such as:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html

https://www.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/index.html

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/covidview/index.html

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/open-america/surveillance-data-analytics.html

Additional COVID-19 public use datasets, include line-level (patient-level) data, are available at: https://data.cdc.gov/browse?tags=covid-19.

Archived Data Notes:

November 3, 2022: Due to a reporting cadence issue, case rates for Missouri counties are calculated based on 11 days’ worth of case count data in the Weekly United States COVID-19 Cases and Deaths by State data released on November 3, 2022, instead of the customary 7 days’ worth of data.

November 10, 2022: Due to a reporting cadence change, case rates for Alabama counties are calculated based on 13 days’ worth of case count data in the Weekly United States COVID-19 Cases and Deaths by State data released on November 10, 2022, instead of the customary 7 days’ worth of data.

November 10, 2022: Per the request of the jurisdiction, cases and deaths among non-residents have been removed from all Hawaii county totals throughout the entire time series. Cumulative case and death counts reported by CDC will no longer match Hawaii’s COVID-19 Dashboard, which still includes non-resident cases and deaths. 

November 17, 2022: Two new columns, weekly historic cases and weekly historic deaths, were added to this dataset on November 17, 2022. These columns reflect case and death counts that were reported that week but were historical in nature and not reflective of the current burden within the jurisdiction. These historical cases and deaths are not included in the new weekly case and new weekly death columns; however, they are reflected in the cumulative totals provided for each jurisdiction. These data are used to account for artificial increases in case and death totals due to batched reporting of historical data.

December 1, 2022: Due to cadence changes over the Thanksgiving holiday, case rates for all Ohio counties are reported as 0 in the data released on December 1, 2022.

January 5, 2023: Due to North Carolina’s holiday reporting cadence, aggregate case and death data will contain 14 days’ worth of data instead of the customary 7 days. As a result, case and death metrics will appear higher than expected in the January 5, 2023, weekly release.

January 12, 2023: Due to data processing delays, Mississippi’s aggregate case and death data will be reported as 0. As a result, case and death metrics will appear lower than expected in the January 12, 2023, weekly release.

January 19, 2023: Due to a reporting cadence issue, Mississippi’s aggregate case and death data will be calculated based on 14 days’ worth of data instead of the customary 7 days in the January 19, 2023, weekly release.

January 26, 2023: Due to a reporting backlog of historic COVID-19 cases, case rates for two Michigan counties (Livingston and Washtenaw) were higher than expected in the January 19, 2023 weekly release.

January 26, 2023: Due to a backlog of historic COVID-19 cases being reported this week, aggregate case and death counts in Charlotte County and Sarasota County, Florida, will appear higher than expected in the January 26, 2023 weekly release.

January 26, 2023: Due to data processing delays, Mississippi’s aggregate case and death data will be reported as 0 in the weekly release posted on January 26, 2023.

February 2, 2023: As of the data collection deadline, CDC observed an abnormally large increase in aggregate COVID-19 cases and deaths reported for Washington State. In response, totals for new cases and new deaths released on February 2, 2023, have been displayed as zero at the state level until the issue is addressed with state officials. CDC is working with state officials to address the issue.

February 2, 2023: Due to a decrease reported in cumulative case counts by Wyoming, case rates will be reported as 0 in the February 2, 2023, weekly release. CDC is working with state officials to verify the data submitted.

February 16, 2023: Due to data processing delays, Utah’s aggregate case and death data will be reported as 0 in the weekly release posted on February 16, 2023. As a result, case and death metrics will appear lower than expected and should be interpreted with caution.

February 16, 2023: Due to a reporting cadence change, Maine’s

The benchmark interest rate in Canada was last recorded at 2.75 percent. This dataset provides - Canada Interest Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.