This layer presents the locations of major cities within the United States with populations of approximately 10,000 or greater, state capitals, and the national capital. Major Cities are locations containing population totals from the 2020 Census.The points represent U.S. Census Places polygons sourced from U.S. Census Bureau 2020 TIGER FGDB (National Sub-State). Attribute fields include 2020 total population from the U.S. Census Public Law 94 data that symbolize the city points using these six classifications: Class Population Range 5 2,500 – 9,999 6 10,000 – 49,999 7 50,000 – 99,999 8 100,000 – 249,999 9 250,000 – 499,999 10 500,000 and overThis ready-to-use layer can be used in ArcGIS Pro and in ArcGIS Online and its configurable apps, dashboards, StoryMaps, custom apps, and mobile apps. The data can also be exported for offline workflows. Cite the 'U.S. Census Bureau' when using this data.

Motivation

In the United States, city governments provide many services: they run public school districts, administer certain welfare and health programs, build roads and manage airports, provide police and fire protection, inspect buildings, and often run water and utility systems. Cities also get revenues through certain local taxes, various fees and permit costs, sale of property, and through the fees they charge for the utilities they run.

It would be interesting to compare all these expenses and revenues across cities and over time, but also quite difficult. Cities share many of these service responsibilities with other government agencies: in one particular city, some roads may be maintained by the state government, some law enforcement provided by the county sheriff, some schools run by independent school districts with their own tax revenue, and some utilities run by special independent utility districts. These governmental structures vary greatly by state and by individual city. It would be hard to make a fair comparison without taking into account all these differences.

This dataset takes into account all those differences. The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy produces what they call “Fiscally Standardized Cities” (FiSCs), aggregating all services provided to city residents regardless of how they may be divided up by different government agencies and jurisdictions. Using this, we can study city expenses and revenues, and how the proportions of different costs vary over time.

Data

The dataset tracks over 200 American cities between 1977 and 2020. Each row represents one city for one year. Revenue and expenditures are broken down into more than 120 categories.

Values are available for FiSCs and also for the entities that make it up: the city, the county, independent school districts, and any special districts, such as utility districts. There are hence five versions of each variable, with suffixes indicating the entity. For example, taxes gives the FiSC’s tax revenue, while taxes_city, taxes_cnty, taxes_schl, and taxes_spec break it down for the city, county, school districts, and special districts.

The values are organized hierarchically. For example, taxes is the sum of tax_property (property taxes), tax_sales_general (sales taxes), tax_income (income tax), and tax_other (other taxes). And tax_income is itself the sum of tax_income_indiv (individual income tax) and tax_income_corp (corporate income tax) subcategories.

Variable Description

• year Year for these values
• city_name Name of the city, such as “AK: Anchorage”, where “AK” is the standard two-letter abbreviation for Alaska
• city_population Estimated city population, based on Census data
• county_name Name of the county the city is in
• county_population Estimated county population, based on Census data
• cpi Consumer Price Index for this year, scaled so that 2020 is 1.
• relationship_city_school Type of school district. 1: City-wide independent school district that serves the entire city. 2: County-wide independent school district that serves the entire county. 3: One or more independent school districts whose boundaries extend beyond the city. 4: School district run by or dependent on the city. 5: School district run by or dependent on the county.
• enrollment Estimated number of public school students living in the city.
• districts_in_city Estimated number of school districts in the city.
• consolidated_govt Whether the city has a consolidated city-county government (1 = yes, 0 = no). For example, Philadelphia’s city and county government are the same entity; they are not separate governments.
• id2_city 12-digit city identifier, from the Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances
• id2_county 12-digit county identifier
• city_types Two types: core and legacy. There are 150 core cities, “including the two largest cities in each state, plus all cities with populations of 150,000+ in 1980 and 200,000+ in 2010”. Legacy cities include “95 cities with population declines of at least 20 percent from their peak, poverty rates exceeding the national average, and a peak population of at least 50,000”. Some cities are both (denoted “core

The revenue and expenses variables are described in this detailed table. Further documentation is available on the FiSC Database website, linked in References below.

All monetary data is already adjusted for inflation, and is given in terms of 2020 US dollars per capita. The Consumer Price Index is provided for each year if you prefer to use numbers not adjusted for inflation, scaled so that 2020 is 1; simply divide each value by the CPI to get the value in that year’s nominal dollars. The total population is also provided if you want total values instead of per-capita values.

Questions

• Do some exploratory data analysis. Are there any outlying cities? Any interesting trends and rela...

Population in largest city in United States was reported at 19034018 in 2024, according to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources. United States - Population in largest city - actual values, historical data, forecasts and projections were sourced from the World Bank on May of 2025.

This dataset contains information about the demographics of all US cities and census-designated places with a population greater or equal to 65,000. This data comes from the US Census Bureau's 2015 American Community Survey. This product uses the Census Bureau Data API but is not endorsed or certified by the Census Bureau.

About this dataset

Context

This list ranks the 4 cities in the Dunn County, ND by White population, as estimated by the United States Census Bureau. It also highlights population changes in each cities over the past five years.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, including:

• 2019-2023 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

Variables / Data Columns

• Rank by White Population: This column displays the rank of cities in the Dunn County, ND by their White population, using the most recent ACS data available.
• cities: The cities for which the rank is shown in the previous column.
• White Population: The White population of the cities is shown in this column.
• % of Total cities Population: This shows what percentage of the total cities population identifies as White. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• % of Total Dunn County White Population: This tells us how much of the entire Dunn County, ND White population lives in that cities. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• 5 Year Rank Trend: TThis column displays the rank trend across the last 5 years.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

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

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

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

United States US: Population in Largest City: as % of Urban Population data was reported at 7.020 % in 2017. This records a decrease from the previous number of 7.065 % for 2016. United States US: Population in Largest City: as % of Urban Population data is updated yearly, averaging 8.675 % from Dec 1960 (Median) to 2017, with 58 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 11.200 % in 1960 and a record low of 7.020 % in 2017. United States US: Population in Largest City: as % of Urban Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Population and Urbanization Statistics. Population in largest city is the percentage of a country's urban population living in that country's largest metropolitan area.; ; United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects.; Weighted average;

About this dataset

Context

This list ranks the 281 cities in the Washington by Multi-Racial Some Other Race (SOR) population, as estimated by the United States Census Bureau. It also highlights population changes in each cities over the past five years.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, including:

• 2019-2023 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

Variables / Data Columns

• Rank by Multi-Racial Other Race Population: This column displays the rank of cities in the Washington by their Multi-Racial Some Other Race (SOR) population, using the most recent ACS data available.
• cities: The cities for which the rank is shown in the previous column.
• Multi-Racial Other Race Population: The Multi-Racial Other Race population of the cities is shown in this column.
• % of Total cities Population: This shows what percentage of the total cities population identifies as Multi-Racial Other Race. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• % of Total Washington Multi-Racial Other Race Population: This tells us how much of the entire Washington Multi-Racial Other Race population lives in that cities. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• 5 Year Rank Trend: TThis column displays the rank trend across the last 5 years.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

A dataset listing Georgia cities by population for 2024.

All cities with a population > 1000 or seats of adm div (ca 80.000)Sources and ContributionsSources : GeoNames is aggregating over hundred different data sources. Ambassadors : GeoNames Ambassadors help in many countries. Wiki : A wiki allows to view the data and quickly fix error and add missing places. Donations and Sponsoring : Costs for running GeoNames are covered by donations and sponsoring.Enrichment:add country name

A dataset listing New Mexico cities by population for 2024.

Tree City USA is a national program that recognizes municipal commitment to community forestry. In return for meeting program requirements, Tree City USA participants expect social, economic, and/or environmental benefits. Understanding the geographic distribution and socioeconomic characteristics of Tree City USA communities at the national scale can offer insights into the motivations or barriers to program participation, and provide context for community forestry research at finer scales. In this study, researchers assessed patterns in Tree City USA participation for all U.S. communities with more than 2,500 people according to geography, community population size, and socioeconomic characteristics, such as income, education, and race. Nationally, 23.5% of communities studied were Tree City USA participants, and this accounted for 53.9% of the total population in these communities. Tree City USA participation rates varied substantially by U.S. region, but in each region participation rates were higher in larger communities, and long-term participants tended to be larger communities than more recent enrollees. In logistic regression models, owner occupancy rates were significant negative predictors of Tree City USA participation, education and percent white population were positive predictors in many U.S. regions, and inconsistent patterns were observed for income and population age. The findings indicate that communities with smaller populations, lower education levels, and higher minority populations are underserved regionally by Tree City USA, and future efforts should identify and overcome barriers to participation in these types of communities. This dataset is associated with the following publication: Berland , A., D. Herrmann , and M. Hopton. National Assessment of Tree City USA Participation According to Geography andSocioeconomic Characteristics. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry. International Society of Arboriculture, Champaign, IL, USA, 42(2): 120-130, (2016).

Sustainable cities depend on urban forests. City trees -- a pillar of urban forests -- improve our health, clean the air, store CO2, and cool local temperatures. Comparatively less is known about urban forests as ecosystems, particularly their spatial composition, nativity statuses, biodiversity, and tree health. Here, we assembled and standardized a new dataset of N=5,660,237 trees from 63 of the largest US cities. The data comes from tree inventories conducted at the level of cities and/or neighborhoods. Each data sheet includes detailed information on tree location, species, nativity status (whether a tree species is naturally occurring or introduced), health, size, whether it is in a park or urban area, and more (comprising 28 standardized columns per datasheet). This dataset could be analyzed in combination with citizen-science datasets on bird, insect, or plant biodiversity; social and demographic data; or data on the physical environment. Urban forests offer a rare opportunity to intentionally design biodiverse, heterogenous, rich ecosystems. Methods See eLife manuscript for full details. Below, we provide a summary of how the dataset was collected and processed.

Data Acquisition We limited our search to the 150 largest cities in the USA (by census population). To acquire raw data on street tree communities, we used a search protocol on both Google and Google Datasets Search (https://datasetsearch.research.google.com/). We first searched the city name plus each of the following: street trees, city trees, tree inventory, urban forest, and urban canopy (all combinations totaled 20 searches per city, 10 each in Google and Google Datasets Search). We then read the first page of google results and the top 20 results from Google Datasets Search. If the same named city in the wrong state appeared in the results, we redid the 20 searches adding the state name. If no data were found, we contacted a relevant state official via email or phone with an inquiry about their street tree inventory. Datasheets were received and transformed to .csv format (if they were not already in that format). We received data on street trees from 64 cities. One city, El Paso, had data only in summary format and was therefore excluded from analyses.

Data Cleaning All code used is in the zipped folder Data S5 in the eLife publication. Before cleaning the data, we ensured that all reported trees for each city were located within the greater metropolitan area of the city (for certain inventories, many suburbs were reported - some within the greater metropolitan area, others not). First, we renamed all columns in the received .csv sheets, referring to the metadata and according to our standardized definitions (Table S4). To harmonize tree health and condition data across different cities, we inspected metadata from the tree inventories and converted all numeric scores to a descriptive scale including “excellent,” “good”, “fair”, “poor”, “dead”, and “dead/dying”. Some cities included only three points on this scale (e.g., “good”, “poor”, “dead/dying”) while others included five (e.g., “excellent,” “good”, “fair”, “poor”, “dead”). Second, we used pandas in Python (W. McKinney & Others, 2011) to correct typos, non-ASCII characters, variable spellings, date format, units used (we converted all units to metric), address issues, and common name format. In some cases, units were not specified for tree diameter at breast height (DBH) and tree height; we determined the units based on typical sizes for trees of a particular species. Wherever diameter was reported, we assumed it was DBH. We standardized health and condition data across cities, preserving the highest granularity available for each city. For our analysis, we converted this variable to a binary (see section Condition and Health). We created a column called “location_type” to label whether a given tree was growing in the built environment or in green space. All of the changes we made, and decision points, are preserved in Data S9. Third, we checked the scientific names reported using gnr_resolve in the R library taxize (Chamberlain & Szöcs, 2013), with the option Best_match_only set to TRUE (Data S9). Through an iterative process, we manually checked the results and corrected typos in the scientific names until all names were either a perfect match (n=1771 species) or partial match with threshold greater than 0.75 (n=453 species). BGS manually reviewed all partial matches to ensure that they were the correct species name, and then we programmatically corrected these partial matches (for example, Magnolia grandifolia-- which is not a species name of a known tree-- was corrected to Magnolia grandiflora, and Pheonix canariensus was corrected to its proper spelling of Phoenix canariensis). Because many of these tree inventories were crowd-sourced or generated in part through citizen science, such typos and misspellings are to be expected. Some tree inventories reported species by common names only. Therefore, our fourth step in data cleaning was to convert common names to scientific names. We generated a lookup table by summarizing all pairings of common and scientific names in the inventories for which both were reported. We manually reviewed the common to scientific name pairings, confirming that all were correct. Then we programmatically assigned scientific names to all common names (Data S9). Fifth, we assigned native status to each tree through reference to the Biota of North America Project (Kartesz, 2018), which has collected data on all native and non-native species occurrences throughout the US states. Specifically, we determined whether each tree species in a given city was native to that state, not native to that state, or that we did not have enough information to determine nativity (for cases where only the genus was known). Sixth, some cities reported only the street address but not latitude and longitude. For these cities, we used the OpenCageGeocoder (https://opencagedata.com/) to convert addresses to latitude and longitude coordinates (Data S9). OpenCageGeocoder leverages open data and is used by many academic institutions (see https://opencagedata.com/solutions/academia). Seventh, we trimmed each city dataset to include only the standardized columns we identified in Table S4. After each stage of data cleaning, we performed manual spot checking to identify any issues.

TABLE III. Deaths in 122 U.S. cities - 2015122 Cities Mortality Reporting System ��� Each week, the vital statistics offices of 122 cities across the United States report the total number of death certificates processed and the number of those for which pneumonia or influenza was listed as the underlying or contributing cause of death by age group (Under 28 days, 28 days ���1 year, 1-14 years, 15-24 years, 25-44 years, 45-64 years, 65-74 years, 75-84 years, and ��� 85 years).FOOTNOTE:U: Unavailable -: No reported cases * Mortality data in this table are voluntarily reported from 122 cities in the United States, most of which have populations of 100,000 or more. A death is reported by the place of its occurrence and by the week that the death certificate was filed. Fetal deaths are not included. ** Totals include unknown ages. *** Partial counts for this city.

Important Note: This item is in mature support as of June 2023 and will retire in December 2025. A new version of this item is available for your use.The layers going from 1:1 to 1:1.5M present the 2010 Census Urbanized Areas (UA) and Urban Clusters (UC). A UA consists of contiguous, densely settled census block groups (BGs) and census blocks that meet minimum population density requirements (1000 people per square mile (ppsm) / 500 ppsm), along with adjacent densely settled census blocks that together encompass a population of at least 50,000 people. A UC consists of contiguous, densely settled census BGs and census blocks that meet minimum population density requirements, along with adjacent densely settled census blocks that together encompass a population of at least 2,500 people, but fewer than 50,000 people. The dataset covers the 50 States plus the District of Columbia within United States. The layer going over 1:1.5M presents the urban areas in the United States derived from the urban areas layer of the Digital Chart of the World (DCW). It provides information about the locations, names, and populations of urbanized areas for conducting geographic analysis on national and large regional scales. To download the data for this layer as a layer package for use in ArcGIS desktop applications, refer to USA Census Urban Areas.

The TIGER/Line shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line shapefile is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. After each decennial census, the Census Bureau delineates urban areas that represent densely developed territory, encompassing residential, commercial, and other nonresidential urban land uses. In general, this territory consists of areas of high population density and urban land use resulting in a representation of the "urban footprint." There are two types of urban areas: urbanized areas (UAs) that contain 50,000 or more people and urban clusters (UCs) that contain at least 2,500 people, but fewer than 50,000 people (except in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam which each contain urban clusters with populations greater than 50,000). Each urban area is identified by a 5-character numeric census code that may contain leading zeroes.

This data set describes metropolitan areas in the conterminous United States, developed from U.S. Bureau of the Census boundaries of Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Areas (CMSA) and Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA), that have been processed to extract the largest contiguous urban area within each MSA or CMSA.

About this dataset

Context

This list ranks the 4 cities in the Letcher County, KY by Black or African American population, as estimated by the United States Census Bureau. It also highlights population changes in each cities over the past five years.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates, including:

• 2019-2023 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
• 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates

Variables / Data Columns

• Rank by Black Population: This column displays the rank of cities in the Letcher County, KY by their Black or African American population, using the most recent ACS data available.
• cities: The cities for which the rank is shown in the previous column.
• Black Population: The Black population of the cities is shown in this column.
• % of Total cities Population: This shows what percentage of the total cities population identifies as Black. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• % of Total Letcher County Black Population: This tells us how much of the entire Letcher County, KY Black population lives in that cities. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.
• 5 Year Rank Trend: TThis column displays the rank trend across the last 5 years.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

A dataset listing Indiana cities by population for 2024.

A dataset listing Colorado cities by population for 2024.