The New York Times is releasing a series of data files with cumulative counts of coronavirus cases in the United States, at the state and county level, over time. We are compiling this time series data from state and local governments and health departments in an attempt to provide a complete record of the ongoing outbreak.

Since the first reported coronavirus case in Washington State on Jan. 21, 2020, The Times has tracked cases of coronavirus in real time as they were identified after testing. Because of the widespread shortage of testing, however, the data is necessarily limited in the picture it presents of the outbreak.

We have used this data to power our maps and reporting tracking the outbreak, and it is now being made available to the public in response to requests from researchers, scientists and government officials who would like access to the data to better understand the outbreak.

The data begins with the first reported coronavirus case in Washington State on Jan. 21, 2020. We will publish regular updates to the data in this repository.

NOTE: This dataset has been retired and marked as historical-only. The recommended dataset to use in its place is https://data.cityofchicago.org/Health-Human-Services/COVID-19-Vaccination-Coverage-Region-HCEZ-/5sc6-ey97.

COVID-19 vaccinations administered to Chicago residents by Healthy Chicago Equity Zones (HCEZ) based on the reported address, race-ethnicity, and age group of the person vaccinated, as provided by the medical provider in the Illinois Comprehensive Automated Immunization Registry Exchange (I-CARE).

Healthy Chicago Equity Zones is an initiative of the Chicago Department of Public Health to organize and support hyperlocal, community-led efforts that promote health and racial equity. Chicago is divided into six HCEZs. Combinations of Chicago’s 77 community areas make up each HCEZ, based on geography. For more information about HCEZs including which community areas are in each zone see: https://data.cityofchicago.org/Health-Human-Services/Healthy-Chicago-Equity-Zones/nk2j-663f

Vaccination Status Definitions:

·People with at least one vaccine dose: Number of people who have received at least one dose of any COVID-19 vaccine, including the single-dose Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine.

·People with a completed vaccine series: Number of people who have completed a primary COVID-19 vaccine series. Requirements vary depending on age and type of primary vaccine series received.

·People with a bivalent dose: Number of people who received a bivalent (updated) dose of vaccine. Updated, bivalent doses became available in Fall 2022 and were created with the original strain of COVID-19 and newer Omicron variant strains.

Weekly cumulative totals by vaccination status are shown for each combination of race-ethnicity and age group within an HCEZ. Note that each HCEZ has a row where HCEZ is “Citywide” and each HCEZ has a row where age is "All" so care should be taken when summing rows.

Vaccinations are counted based on the date on which they were administered. Weekly cumulative totals are reported from the week ending Saturday, December 19, 2020 onward (after December 15, when vaccines were first administered in Chicago) through the Saturday prior to the dataset being updated.

Population counts are from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-year estimates.

Coverage percentages are calculated based on the cumulative number of people in each population subgroup (age group by race-ethnicity within an HCEZ) who have each vaccination status as of the date, divided by the estimated number of people in that subgroup.

Actual counts may exceed population estimates and lead to >100% coverage, especially in small race-ethnicity subgroups of each age group within an HCEZ. All coverage percentages are capped at 99%.

All data are provisional and subject to change. Information is updated as additional details are received and it is, in fact, very common for recent dates to be incomplete and to be updated as time goes on. At any given time, this dataset reflects data currently known to CDPH.

Numbers in this dataset may differ from other public sources due to when data are reported and how City of Chicago boundaries are defined.

CDPH uses the most complete data available to estimate COVID-19 vaccination coverage among Chicagoans, but there are several limitations that impact its estimates. Data reported in I-CARE only includes doses administered in Illinois and some doses administered outside of Illinois reported historically by Illinois providers. Doses administered by the federal Bureau of Prisons and Department of Defense are also not currently reported in I-CARE. The Veterans Health Administration began reporting doses in I-CARE beginning September 2022. Due to people receiving vaccinations that are not recorded in I-CARE that can be linked to their record, such as someone receiving a vaccine dose in another state, the number of people with a completed series or a booster dose is underesti

NOTE: This dataset has been retired and marked as historical-only. Weekly rates of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths among people living in Chicago by vaccination status and age. Rates for fully vaccinated and unvaccinated begin the week ending April 3, 2021 when COVID-19 vaccines became widely available in Chicago. Rates for boosted begin the week ending October 23, 2021 after booster shots were recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for adults 65+ years old and adults in certain populations and high risk occupational and institutional settings who received Pfizer or Moderna for their primary series or anyone who received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. Chicago residency is based on home address, as reported in the Illinois Comprehensive Automated Immunization Registry Exchange (I-CARE) and Illinois National Electronic Disease Surveillance System (I-NEDSS). Outcomes: • Cases: People with a positive molecular (PCR) or antigen COVID-19 test result from an FDA-authorized COVID-19 test that was reported into I-NEDSS. A person can become re-infected with SARS-CoV-2 over time and so may be counted more than once in this dataset. Cases are counted by week the test specimen was collected. • Hospitalizations: COVID-19 cases who are hospitalized due to a documented COVID-19 related illness or who are admitted for any reason within 14 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Hospitalizations are counted by week of hospital admission. • Deaths: COVID-19 cases who died from COVID-19-related health complications as determined by vital records or a public health investigation. Deaths are counted by week of death. Vaccination status: • Fully vaccinated: Completion of primary series of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine at least 14 days prior to a positive test (with no other positive tests in the previous 45 days). • Boosted: Fully vaccinated with an additional or booster dose of any FDA-authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine received at least 14 days prior to a positive test (with no other positive tests in the previous 45 days). • Unvaccinated: No evidence of having received a dose of an FDA-authorized or approved vaccine prior to a positive test. CLARIFYING NOTE: Those who started but did not complete all recommended doses of an FDA-authorized or approved vaccine prior to a positive test (i.e., partially vaccinated) are excluded from this dataset. Incidence rates for fully vaccinated but not boosted people (Vaccinated columns) are calculated as total fully vaccinated but not boosted with outcome divided by cumulative fully vaccinated but not boosted at the end of each week. Incidence rates for boosted (Boosted columns) are calculated as total boosted with outcome divided by cumulative boosted at the end of each week. Incidence rates for unvaccinated (Unvaccinated columns) are calculated as total unvaccinated with outcome divided by total population minus cumulative boosted, fully, and partially vaccinated at the end of each week. All rates are multiplied by 100,000. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) are calculated by dividing the weekly incidence rates among unvaccinated people by those among fully vaccinated but not boosted and boosted people. Overall age-adjusted incidence rates and IRRs are standardized using the 2000 U.S. Census standard population. Population totals are from U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 1-year estimates for 2019. All data are provisional and subject to change. Information is updated as additional details are received and it is, in fact, very common for recent dates to be incomplete and to be updated as time goes on. This dataset reflects data known to CDPH at the time when the dataset is updated each week. Numbers in this dataset may differ from other public sources due to when data are reported and how City of Chicago boundaries are defined. For all datasets related to COVID-19, see https://data.cityofchic

This dataset is a per-state amalgamation of demographic, public health and other relevant predictors for COVID-19.

Deaths, Infections and Tests by State

The COVID Tracking Project: https://covidtracking.com/data/api

Used positive, death and totalTestResults from the API for, respectively, Infected, Deaths and Tested in this dataset. Please read the documentation of the API for more context on those columns

Predictor Data and Sources

Population (2020)

Density is people per meter squared https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/

ICU Beds and Age 60+

https://khn.org/news/as-coronavirus-spreads-widely-millions-of-older-americans-live-in-counties-with-no-icu-beds/

GDP

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/gdp-by-state/

Income per capita (2018)

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/per-capita-income-by-state/

Gini

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_Gini_coefficient

Unemployment (2020)

Rates from Feb 2020 and are percentage of labor force
https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

Sex (2017)

Ratio is Male / Female
https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/distribution-by-gender/

Smoking Percentage (2020)

https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/smoking-rates-by-state/

Influenza and Pneumonia Death Rate (2018)

Death rate per 100,000 people
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/flu_pneumonia_mortality/flu_pneumonia.htm

Chronic Lower Respiratory Disease Death Rate (2018)

Death rate per 100,000 people
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/lung_disease_mortality/lung_disease.htm

Active Physicians (2019)

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/total-active-physicians/

Hospitals (2018)

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/total-hospitals

Health spending per capita

Includes spending for all health care services and products by state of residence. Hospital spending is included and reflects the total net revenue. Costs such as insurance, administration, research, and construction expenses are not included.
https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/avg-annual-growth-per-capita/

Pollution (2019)

Pollution: Average exposure of the general public to particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5) measured in micrograms per cubic meter (3-year estimate)
https://www.americashealthrankings.org/explore/annual/measure/air/state/ALL

Medium and Large Airports

For each state, number of medium and large airports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_busiest_airports_in_the_United_States

Temperature (2019)

Note that FL was incorrect in the table, but is corrected in the Hottest States paragraph
https://worldpopulationreview.com/states/average-temperatures-by-state/
District of Columbia temperature computed as the average of Maryland and Virginia

Urbanization (2010)

Urbanization as a percentage of the population https://www.icip.iastate.edu/tables/population/urban-pct-states

Age Groups (2018)

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/distribution-by-age/

School Closure Dates

Schools that haven't closed are marked NaN https://www.edweek.org/ew/section/multimedia/map-coronavirus-and-school-closures.html

Note that some datasets above did not contain data for District of Columbia, this missing data was found via Google searches manually entered.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Veterans in America

County-Level Data on Veteran Cases and Proportion of Population

About this dataset

Welcome to the Kaggle dataset on The Impact of COVID-19 on Veterans in the United States! This dataset contains data on confirmed cases of COVID-19 in counties across the United States, as well as information on the percentage of each county's population that are veterans. With this dataset, you can investigate how the pandemic has impacted veterans specifically, and compare veteran case rates to the general population. How do veteran cases differ across age groups? Are there any geographical patterns? What can we learn about risk factors for COVID-19 among veterans? Download the dataset and explore for yourself today!

How to use the dataset

This dataset includes information on the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 by county, as well as the percentage of the population in each county that are veterans. This data can be used to examine the relationship between veteran cases and the proportion of population who are veterans.

To do this, simply look at the 'CASES' and 'VET_CASES' columns for each county. The 'CASES' column represents the total number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in that county, while the 'VET_CASES' column represents the number of confirmed cases among veterans. To compare these two values, simply divide 'VET_CASES' by 'CASES'. This will give you a ratio of veteran cases to total cases for each county.

You can then use this ratio to compare counties and see which ones have a higher proportion of veteran cases. This data can be used to help understand where more outreach may be needed to support veterans during this pandemic

Research Ideas

• Find the correlation between the number of veterans in a county and the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19.
• Find the counties with the highest percentage of veterans and the lowest number of confirmed cases of COVID-19.
• Predict how many veterans in a county will contract COVID-19 based on the percentage of veterans in the population

Columns

File: CountyVACOVID.csv | Column name | Description | |:---------------------------|:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | FIPS | Federal Information Processing Standards code that uniquely identifies counties within the USA. (String) | | COUNTY | County name. (String) | | STATE | State name. (String) | | POP | County population. (Integer) | | VETS | Number of veterans in the county. (Integer) | | VET_PERCENT | Percentage of the population that are veterans. (Float) | | CASES | Number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the county. (Integer) | | YESTER_CASES | Number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the county from the previous day. (Integer) | | VET_CASES | Number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in veterans in the county. (Integer) | | VET_YESTER | Number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in veterans in the county from the previous day. (Integer) | | LOWER_Hospitalizations | Lower bound of the 95% confidence interval for the number of hospitalizations due to COVID-19 in the county. (Integer) | | UPPER_Hospitalizations | Upper bound of the 95% confidence interval for the number of hospitalizations due to COVID-19 in the county. (Integer) | | DATE | Date of data. (Date) |

File: VAChart.csv | Column name | Description | |:------------------------|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | DATE | Date of data. (Date) | | US Cases | The number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the United States. (Integer) | | **New US ...

This file contains COVID-19 death counts, death rates, and percent of total deaths by jurisdiction of residence. The data is grouped by different time periods including 3-month period, weekly, and total (cumulative since January 1, 2020). United States death counts and rates include the 50 states, plus the District of Columbia and New York City. New York state estimates exclude New York City. Puerto Rico is included in HHS Region 2 estimates. Deaths with confirmed or presumed COVID-19, coded to ICD–10 code U07.1. Number of deaths reported in this file are the total number of COVID-19 deaths received and coded as of the date of analysis and may not represent all deaths that occurred in that period. Counts of deaths occurring before or after the reporting period are not included in the file. Data during recent periods are incomplete because of the lag in time between when the death occurred and when the death certificate is completed, submitted to NCHS and processed for reporting purposes. This delay can range from 1 week to 8 weeks or more, depending on the jurisdiction and cause of death. Death counts should not be compared across states. Data timeliness varies by state. Some states report deaths on a daily basis, while other states report deaths weekly or monthly. The ten (10) United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) regions include the following jurisdictions. Region 1: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Region 2: New Jersey, New York, New York City, Puerto Rico; Region 3: Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia; Region 4: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee; Region 5: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin; Region 6: Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Region 7: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska; Region 8: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming; Region 9: Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada; Region 10: Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington. Rates were calculated using the population estimates for 2021, which are estimated as of July 1, 2021 based on the Blended Base produced by the US Census Bureau in lieu of the April 1, 2020 decennial population count. The Blended Base consists of the blend of Vintage 2020 postcensal population estimates, 2020 Demographic Analysis Estimates, and 2020 Census PL 94-171 Redistricting File (see https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/technical-documentation/methodology/2020-2021/methods-statement-v2021.pdf). Rates are based on deaths occurring in the specified week/month and are age-adjusted to the 2000 standard population using the direct method (see https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr70/nvsr70-08-508.pdf). These rates differ from annual age-adjusted rates, typically presented in NCHS publications based on a full year of data and annualized weekly/monthly age-adjusted rates which have been adjusted to allow comparison with annual rates. Annualization rates presents deaths per year per 100,000 population that would be expected in a year if the observed period specific (weekly/monthly) rate prevailed for a full year. Sub-national death counts between 1-9 are suppressed in accordance with NCHS data confidentiality standards. Rates based on death counts less than 20 are suppressed in accordance with NCHS standards of reliability as specified in NCHS Data Presentation Standards for Proportions (available from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_02/sr02_175.pdf.).

This public use dataset has 11 data elements reflecting United States COVID-19 community levels for all available counties. This dataset contains the same values used to display information available on the COVID Data Tracker at: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#county-view?list_select_state=all_states&list_select_county=all_counties&data-type=CommunityLevels The data are updated weekly.

CDC looks at the combination of three metrics — new COVID-19 admissions per 100,000 population in the past 7 days, the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients, and total new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days — to determine the COVID-19 community level. The COVID-19 community level is determined by the higher of the new admissions and inpatient beds metrics, based on the current level of new cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days. New COVID-19 admissions and the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied represent the current potential for strain on the health system. Data on new cases acts as an early warning indicator of potential increases in health system strain in the event of a COVID-19 surge. Using these data, the COVID-19 community level is classified as low, medium, or high. COVID-19 Community Levels can help communities and individuals make decisions based on their local context and their unique needs. Community vaccination coverage and other local information, like early alerts from surveillance, such as through wastewater or the number of emergency department visits for COVID-19, when available, can also inform decision making for health officials and individuals.

See https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/community-levels.html for more information.

For the most accurate and up-to-date data for any county or state, visit the relevant health department website. COVID Data Tracker may display data that differ from state and local websites. This can be due to differences in how data were collected, how metrics were calculated, or the timing of web updates.

For more details on the Minnesota Department of Health COVID-19 thresholds, see COVID-19 Public Health Risk Measures: Data Notes (Updated 4/13/22). https://mn.gov/covid19/assets/phri_tcm1148-434773.pdf

Note: This dataset was renamed from "United States COVID-19 Community Levels by County as Originally Posted" to "United States COVID-19 Community Levels by County" on March 31, 2022. March 31, 2022: Column name for county population was changed to “county_population”. No change was made to the data points previous released. March 31, 2022: New column, “health_service_area_population”, was added to the dataset to denote the total population in the designated Health Service Area based on 2019 Census estimate. March 31, 2022: FIPS codes for territories American Samoa, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and United States Virgin Islands were re-formatted to 5-digit numeric for records released on 3/3/2022 to be consistent with other records in the dataset. March 31, 2022: Changes were made to the text fields in variables “county”, “state”, and “health_service_area” so the formats are consistent across releases. March 31, 2022: The “%” sign was removed from the text field in column “covid_inpatient_bed_utilization”. No change was made to the data. As indicated in the column description, values in this column represent the percentage of staffed inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients (7-day average). March 31, 2022: Data values for columns, “county_population”, “health_service_area_number”, and “health_service_area” were backfilled for records released on 2/24/2022. These columns were added since the week of 3/3/2022, thus the values were previously missing for records released the week prior. April 7, 2022: Updates made to data released on 3/24/2022 for Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and United States Virgin Islands to correct a data mapping error.

Context

The most prevalent condition in the study is obesity, affecting just over 30 percent of Americans and it followed by diabetes which has a national prevalence of 11.2 percent. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and cardiovascular disease have a prevalence of just under 7 percent while chronic kidney disease is at approximately 3 percent. The CDC stated that "while the estimated number of persons with any underlying medical condition was higher in population-dense metropolitan areas, overall prevalence was higher in rural nonmetropolitan areas". It also added that "the counties with the highest prevalences of any condition were concentrated in Southeastern states, particularly in Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, and West Virginia, as well as some counties in Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and northern Michigan, among others".

https://www.statista.com/chart/22365/prevalence-of-underlying-conditions-in-us-adults/

Content

Several studies have found that the risk of contracting severe Covid-19 that can result in hospitalization, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation or death increases with age as well as the presence of underlying health conditions. In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently released a study showing that a considerable share of the American population has some form of underlying health issue, placing them at risk from severe forms of the virus. The study's findings are based on the 2018 Behavioural Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and U.S. Census population data and it determined that 40.7 percent of U.S. adults (aged 18 and over) have a pre-existing health condition.

Acknowledgements

Niall McCarthy, Data Journalist https://www.statista.com/chart/22365/prevalence-of-underlying-conditions-in-us-adults/

Inspiration

Covid-19

A. SUMMARY This dataset represents the COVID-19 vaccinations given to residents of San Francisco over time. All vaccines given to SF residents are included, no matter where the vaccination took place (the vaccine may have been administered in San Francisco or outside of San Francisco). The data are broken down by multiple demographic stratifications. This dataset also includes COVID-19 vaccinations given to SF residents by the San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH) over time.

Data provides counts for residents who have received at least one dose, residents who have completed a primary vaccine series, residents who have received one or two monovalent (not bivalent) booster doses, and residents who have received a bivalent booster dose. A primary vaccine series is complete after an individual has received all intended doses of the initial series. There are one, two, and three dose primary vaccine series.

B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED Information on doses administered to those who live in San Francisco is from the California Immunization Registry (CAIR2), run by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). The information on individuals’ city of residence, age, race, and ethnicity are also recorded in CAIR and are self-reported at the time of vaccine administration.

In order to estimate the percent of San Franciscans vaccinated, we provide the 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS) population estimates for each demographic group.

C. UPDATE PROCESS Updated daily via automated process

D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET San Francisco population estimates for race/ethnicity and age groups can be found in a view based on the San Francisco Population and Demographic Census dataset. These population estimates are from the 2016-2020 5-year American Community Survey (ACS).

Before analysis, you must filter the dataset to the desired stratification of data using the "overall_segment" column.

For example, filtering "overall_segment" to "All SF Residents by Age Bracket, Administered by All Providers" will filter the data to residents whose vaccinations were administered by any provider. You can then further segment the data and calculate percentages by Age Brackets.

If you filter "overall_segment" to "All SF Residents by Race/Ethnicity, Administered by DPH Only", you will see the race/ethnicity breakdown for residents who received vaccinations from the San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH).

If you filter "overall_segment" to "All SF Residents by Age Group, Administered by All Providers" you will see vaccination counts of various age eligibility groups that were administered by any provider.

To count the number of individuals vaccinated (with any primary series dose) for the first time on a given day, use the "new_recipients" column. To count the number of individuals who have completed their primary vaccine series on a given day, use the "new_series_completed" column. To count the number of primary series doses administered on a day (1st, 2nd, 3rd, or single doses), use the "new_primary_series_doses" column.

To count the number of individuals who received their first or second monovalent (not bivalent) booster dose on a given day, use the "new_booster_recipients" and "new_2nd_booster_recipients" columns. To count the number of individuals who received their first bivalent booster dose on a given day, use the "new_bivalent_booster_recipients" column. To count the number of monovalent (not including bivalent) or bivalent booster doses administered on a given day, use the "new_booster_doses" or "new_bivalent_booster_doses" columns.

To count the number of individuals who have received a vaccine up to a certain date, use the columns beginning with "cumulative_..."

E. ARCHIVED DATA A previous version of this dataset

A. SUMMARY This dataset includes San Francisco COVID-19 tests by race/ethnicity and by date. This dataset represents the daily count of tests collected, and the breakdown of test results (positive, negative, or indeterminate). Tests in this dataset include all those collected from persons who listed San Francisco as their home address at the time of testing. It also includes tests that were collected by San Francisco providers for persons who were missing a locating address. This dataset does not include tests for residents listing a locating address outside of San Francisco, even if they were tested in San Francisco.

The data were de-duplicated by individual and date, so if a person gets tested multiple times on different dates, all tests will be included in this dataset (on the day each test was collected). If a person tested multiple times on the same date, only one test is included from that date. When there are multiple tests on the same date, a positive result, if one exists, will always be selected as the record for the person. If a PCR and antigen test are taken on the same day, the PCR test will supersede. If a person tests multiple times on the same day and the results are all the same (e.g. all negative or all positive) then the first test done is selected as the record for the person.

The total number of positive test results is not equal to the total number of COVID-19 cases in San Francisco.

When a person gets tested for COVID-19, they may be asked to report information about themselves. One piece of information that might be requested is a person's race and ethnicity. These data are often incomplete in the laboratory and provider reports of the test results sent to the health department. The data can be missing or incomplete for several possible reasons:

• The person was not asked about their race and ethnicity.
• The person was asked, but refused to answer.
• The person answered, but the testing provider did not include the person's answers in the reports.
• The testing provider reported the person's answers in a format that could not be used by the health department.

For any of these reasons, a person's race/ethnicity will be recorded in the dataset as “Unknown.”

B. NOTE ON RACE/ETHNICITY The different values for Race/Ethnicity in this dataset are "Asian;" "Black or African American;" "Hispanic or Latino/a, all races;" "American Indian or Alaska Native;" "Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander;" "White;" "Multi-racial;" "Other;" and “Unknown."

The Race/Ethnicity categorization increases data clarity by emulating the methodology used by the U.S. Census in the American Community Survey. Specifically, persons who identify as "Asian," "Black or African American," "American Indian or Alaska Native," "Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander," "White," "Multi-racial," or "Other" do NOT include any person who identified as Hispanic/Latino at any time in their testing reports that either (1) identified them as SF residents or (2) as someone who tested without a locating address by an SF provider. All persons across all races who identify as Hispanic/Latino are recorded as “"Hispanic or Latino/a, all races." This categorization increases data accuracy by correcting the way “Other” persons were counted. Previously, when a person reported “Other” for Race/Ethnicity, they would be recorded “Unknown.” Under the new categorization, they are counted as “Other” and are distinct from “Unknown.”

If a person records their race/ethnicity as “Asian,” “Black or African American,” “American Indian or Alaska Native,” “Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander,” “White,” or “Other” for their first COVID-19 test, then this data will not change—even if a different race/ethnicity is reported for this person for any future COVID-19 test. There are two exceptions to this rule. The first exception is if a person’s race/ethnicity value is reported as “Unknown” on their first test and then on a subsequent test they report “Asian;” "Black or African American;" "Hispanic or Latino/a, all races;" "American Indian or Alaska Native;" "Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander;" or "White”, then this subsequent reported race/ethnicity will overwrite the previous recording of “Unknown”. If a person has only ever selected “Unknown” as their race/ethnicity, then it will be recorded as “Unknown.” This change provides more specific and actionable data on who is tested in San Francisco.

The second exception is if a person ever marks “Hispanic or Latino/a, all races” for race/ethnicity then this choice will always overwrite any previous or future response. This is because it is an overarching category that can include any and all other races and is mutually exclusive with the other responses.

A person's race/ethnicity will be recorded as “Multi-racial” if they select two or more values among the following choices: “Asian,” “Black or African American,” “American Indian or Alaska Native,” “Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander,” “White,” or “Other.” If a person selects a combination of two or more race/ethnicity answers that includes “Hispanic or Latino/a, all races” then they will still be recorded as “Hispanic or Latino/a, all races”—not as “Multi-racial.”

C. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED COVID-19 laboratory test data is based on electronic laboratory test reports. Deduplication, quality assurance measures and other data verification processes maximize accuracy of laboratory test information.

D. UPDATE PROCESS Updates automatically at 5:00AM Pacific Time each day. Redundant runs are scheduled at 7:00AM and 9:00AM in case of pipeline failure.

E. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET San Francisco population estimates for race/ethnicity can be found in a view based on the San Francisco Population and Demographic Census dataset. These population estimates are from the 2016-2020 5-year American Community Survey (ACS).

Due to the high degree of variation in the time needed to complete tests by different labs there is a delay in this reporting. On March 24, 2020 the Health Officer ordered all labs in the City to report complete COVID-19 testing information to the local and state health departments.

In order to track trends over time, a user can analyze this data by sorting or filtering by the "specimen_collection_date" field.

Calculating Percent Positivity: The positivity rate is the percentage of tests that return a positive result for COVID-19 (positive tests divided by the sum of positive and negative tests). Indeterminate results, which could not conclusively determine whether COVID-19 virus was present, are not included in the calculation of percent positive. When there are fewer than 20 positives tests for a given race/ethnicity and time period, the positivity rate is not calculated for the public tracker because rates of small test counts are less reliable.

Calculating Testing Rates: To calculate the testing rate per 10,000 residents, divide the total number of tests collected (positive, negative, and indeterminate results) for the specified race/ethnicity by the total number of residents who identify as that race/ethnicity (according to the 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS) population estimate), then multiply by 10,000. When there are fewer than 20 total tests for a given race/ethnicity and time period, the testing rate is not calculated for the public tracker because rates of small test counts are less reliable.

Read more about how this data is updated and validated daily: https://sf.gov/information/covid-19-data-questions

F. CHANGE LOG

• 1/12/2024 - This dataset will stop updating as of 1/12/2024
• 6/21/2023 - A small number of additional COVID-19 testing records were released as part of our ongoing data cleaning efforts. An update to the race or ethnicity designation among a subset of testing records was simultaneously released.
• 1/31/2023 - updated “population_estimate” column to reflect the 2020 Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) San Francisco Population estimates.
• 1/31/2023 - renamed column “last_updated_at” to “data_as_of”.
• 3/23/2022 - ‘Native American’ changed to ‘American Indian or Alaska Native’ to align with the census.
• 2/10/2022 - race/ethnicity categorization was changed. See section NOTE ON RACE/ETHNICITY for additional information.
• 4/16/2021 - dataset updated to refresh with a five-day data lag.

Context

"The U.S. has now passed the grim milestone of 150,000 coronavirus deaths with Califoria, Florida and Texas all recently setting single-day records for deaths from the pandemic. On July 29, one American was dying from Covid-19 every minute with the total number of infections approaching 4.4 million. Studies have found that men are dying at nearly twice the rate of women in the U.S. while the pandemic is proving especially devastating for black Americans who are dying at nearly three times the rate of white people." https://www.statista.com/chart/22430/coronavirus-deaths-by-race-in-the-us/

Content

"That's according to The COVID Tracking Project who state that 30,648 black lives have been lost to the coronavirus to date, accounting for 23 percent of all U.S. deaths where race is known. The deaths were broken down by race or ethnicity with 74 black Americans dying per 100,000 people compared to 30 white Americans per 100,000 people as of July 30, 2020."

Acknowledgements

Niall McCarthy, Data Journalist https://www.statista.com/chart/22430/coronavirus-deaths-by-race-in-the-us/ Photo United Nations COVID-19 Response on Unsplash

Inspiration

Covid-19

To estimate county of residence of Filipinx healthcare workers who died of COVID-19, we retrieved data from the Kanlungan website during the month of December 2020.22 In deciding who to include on the website, the AF3IRM team that established the Kanlungan website set two standards in data collection. First, the team found at least one source explicitly stating that the fallen healthcare worker was of Philippine ancestry; this was mostly media articles or obituaries sharing the life stories of the deceased. In a few cases, the confirmation came directly from the deceased healthcare worker's family member who submitted a tribute. Second, the team required a minimum of two sources to identify and announce fallen healthcare workers. We retrieved 86 US tributes from Kanlungan, but only 81 of them had information on county of residence. In total, 45 US counties with at least one reported tribute to a Filipinx healthcare worker who died of COVID-19 were identified for analysis and will hereafter be referred to as “Kanlungan counties.” Mortality data by county, race, and ethnicity came from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS).24 Updated weekly, this dataset is based on vital statistics data for use in conducting public health surveillance in near real time to provide provisional mortality estimates based on data received and processed by a specified cutoff date, before data are finalized and publicly released.25 We used the data released on December 30, 2020, which included provisional COVID-19 death counts from February 1, 2020 to December 26, 2020—during the height of the pandemic and prior to COVID-19 vaccines being available—for counties with at least 100 total COVID-19 deaths. During this time period, 501 counties (15.9% of the total 3,142 counties in all 50 states and Washington DC)26 met this criterion. Data on COVID-19 deaths were available for six major racial/ethnic groups: Non-Hispanic White, Non-Hispanic Black, Non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, Non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native, Non-Hispanic Asian (hereafter referred to as Asian American), and Hispanic. People with more than one race, and those with unknown race were included in the “Other” category. NCHS suppressed county-level data by race and ethnicity if death counts are less than 10. In total, 133 US counties reported COVID-19 mortality data for Asian Americans. These data were used to calculate the percentage of all COVID-19 decedents in the county who were Asian American. We used data from the 2018 American Community Survey (ACS) five-year estimates, downloaded from the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series (IPUMS) to create county-level population demographic variables.27 IPUMS is publicly available, and the database integrates samples using ACS data from 2000 to the present using a high degree of precision.27 We applied survey weights to calculate the following variables at the county-level: median age among Asian Americans, average income to poverty ratio among Asian Americans, the percentage of the county population that is Filipinx, and the percentage of healthcare workers in the county who are Filipinx. Healthcare workers encompassed all healthcare practitioners, technical occupations, and healthcare service occupations, including nurse practitioners, physicians, surgeons, dentists, physical therapists, home health aides, personal care aides, and other medical technicians and healthcare support workers. County-level data were available for 107 out of the 133 counties (80.5%) that had NCHS data on the distribution of COVID-19 deaths among Asian Americans, and 96 counties (72.2%) with Asian American healthcare workforce data. The ACS 2018 five-year estimates were also the source of county-level percentage of the Asian American population (alone or in combination) who are Filipinx.8 In addition, the ACS provided county-level population counts26 to calculate population density (people per 1,000 people per square mile), estimated by dividing the total population by the county area, then dividing by 1,000 people. The county area was calculated in ArcGIS 10.7.1 using the county boundary shapefile and projected to Albers equal area conic (for counties in the US contiguous states), Hawai’i Albers Equal Area Conic (for Hawai’i counties), and Alaska Albers Equal Area Conic (for Alaska counties).20

The American Trends Panel (ATP), created by "https://www.pewresearch.org/" Target="_blank">Pew Research Center, is a nationally representative panel of randomly selected U.S. adults. Panelists participate via self-administered web surveys. Panelists who do not have internet access at home are provided with a tablet and wireless internet connection. Interviews are conducted in both English and Spanish. The panel is being managed by "https://www.ipsos.com/en" Target="_blank">Ipsos.

The "https://www.pewresearch.org/science/dataset/american-trends-panel-wave-114/" Target="_blank">ATP Wave 114 was conducted from September 13 to 18, 2022. A total of 10,588 panelists responded out of 11,687 who were sampled for a response rate of 91 percent. The cumulative response rate accounting for nonresponse to the recruitment surveys and attrition is 3 percent. The break-off rate among panelists who logged on to the survey and completed at least one item is 1 percent. The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 10,588 respondents is plus or minus 1.5 percentage points.

The ATPW114 addresses topics of COVID-19, scientists and religion.

Background: In the absence of an effective vaccine, public health policies are aimed at awareness, and education of the general public in order to contain the quickly spreading COVID-19 pandemic. Most of the recommended precautionary measures are dependent on human behaviors and therefore their effectiveness largely depends on peoples' perception and attitudes toward the disease. This study aimed to assess the level of knowledge, risk perception, and precautionary measures taken in response to COVID-19 in North America.Methods: In this cross-sectional observational study, an online survey targeted to North Americans focused on the public's knowledge of COVID-19, risk perception, and precautionary behaviors taken in response to this pandemic. Descriptive analyses were performed for the whole population and the subgroup analyses contrasted the differences between Americans and Canadians.Results: The cohort comprised 1,264 relatively young participants with an average age of 28.6 ± 9.8 years. The vast majority (>90%) were knowledgeable about COVID-19. Regarding risk perception, about a quarter assumed to be at less risk to contract the disease, and 42.8% considered themselves to be less contagious than others. While the vast majority avoided performing risky behaviors, only a small proportion (13.2%) wore a face mask—which is in line with the public health recommendations of the two countries at the time of data collection. Overall, a larger proportion of Canadian participants (55.8%) were satisfied with the performance of their national public health in response to the current pandemic, compared to their American counterparts (12.2%).Discussion: Data regarding the public's knowledge of COVID-19, risk perception, and behaviors in response to this pandemic is limited. The results of this study highlight that this relatively young and educated sample of North Americans had a high level of knowledge about COVID-19 and a large proportion of them were taking the precautionary measures against this pandemic. However, a significant number of individuals believe to be at less risk of contracting the disease compared to the general population. Educating the public that no one is safe from this disease, could play a role in further limiting risky behaviors and ultimately facilitating disease containment.

Percentage of workforce laid off to adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic, by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), business employment size, type of business, business activity and majority ownership.

As of 10/27/2022, this dataset will no longer update. To continue to access updated vaccination metrics given to SF residents, including newly added bivalent boosters, please navigate to the following page: COVID-19 Vaccinations Given to SF Residents by Geography.

A. SUMMARY This dataset represents the COVID-19 vaccinations given to SF residents summarized by the geographic region of their residential address. All vaccines given to SF residents are included, no matter where the vaccination took place (the vaccine may have been administered in San Francisco or outside of San Francisco). As of December 21, 2021, data provides counts for people who have received at least one dose, people who have completed a primary vaccine series, and people who have received a booster dose of the vaccine. A primary vaccine series is complete after an individual has received all intended doses of the series. As of May 2022, there were one, two, and three dose primary vaccine series.

B. HOW THE DATASET IS CREATED Information on doses administered to those who live in San Francisco is from the California Immunization Registry (CAIR), run by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH).

In order to estimate the percent of San Francisco residents vaccinated (as we do on the public dashboard at https://sf.gov/data/covid-19-vaccinations-neighborhood), we have included the 2019 5-year American Community Survey population estimate for each analysis neighborhood. (https://api.census.gov/data/2019/acs/acs5/groups/B01001.html)

C. UPDATE PROCESS Updated daily via automated process

D. HOW TO USE THIS DATASET This dataset contains counts of San Franciscans who have received at least one dose (count_vaccinated), as well as counts of San Franciscans who have received at least one dose from the SF Department of Public Health (count_vaccinated_by_dph). This dataset also contains counts of San Franciscans who have completed their vaccine series (count_series_completed) and counts of residents who have received a booster dose (count_received_booster). This data is grouped by San Franciscans’ analysis neighborhoods of residence.

Percentage of workforce laid off because of COVID-19, by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code, business employment size, type of business and majority ownership.

This commuter mode share data shows the estimated percentages of commuters in Champaign County who traveled to work using each of the following modes: drove alone in an automobile; carpooled; took public transportation; walked; biked; went by motorcycle, taxi, or other means; and worked at home. Commuter mode share data can illustrate the use of and demand for transit services and active transportation facilities, as well as for automobile-focused transportation projects.

Driving alone in an automobile is by far the most prevalent means of getting to work in Champaign County, accounting for about 64 percent of all work trips in 2024. This is a statistically significant decrease since 2023, which was the first year that matched pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels of driving alone.

The percentage of workers who commuted by all other means to a workplace outside the home also decreased from 2019 to 2021, most of these modes reaching a record low since this data first started being tracked in 2005. All of these modes except public transportation saw increases from 2023 to 2024, but they were not statistically significant. The percentage of people walking to work saw a statistically significant increase from 2022 to 2024.

Meanwhile, the percentage of people in Champaign County who worked at home more than quadrupled from 2019 to 2021, reaching a record high over 18 percent. It is a safe assumption that this can be attributed to the increase of employers allowing employees to work at home when the COVID-19 pandemic began in 2020.

The work from home figure decreased to 11.2 percent in 2023, but which is the first statistically significant decrease since the pandemic began. However, this figure saw a statistically significant increase from 2023 to 2024, rising back from 15.1 percent in 2024. This figure is about 3.3 times higher than 2019, despite the COVID-19 emergency ending in 2023.

Commuter mode share data was sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) 1-Year Estimates, which are released annually.

As with any datasets that are estimates rather than exact counts, it is important to take into account the margins of error (listed in the column beside each figure) when drawing conclusions from the data.

Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, instead of providing the standard 1-year data products, the Census Bureau released experimental estimates from the 1-year data in 2020. This includes a limited number of data tables for the nation, states, and the District of Columbia. The Census Bureau states that the 2020 ACS 1-year experimental tables use an experimental estimation methodology and should not be compared with other ACS data. For these reasons, and because data is not available for Champaign County, no data for 2020 is included in this Indicator.

For interested data users, the 2020 ACS 1-Year Experimental data release includes a dataset on Means of Transportation to Work.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2024 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (19 November 2024).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2023 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (18 September 2024).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2022 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (10 October 2023).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2021 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (14 October 2022).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2019 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (26 March 2021).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2018 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (26 March 2021).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (13 September 2018).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2016 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (14 September 2017).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2015 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (19 September 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2014 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2013 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2012 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2011 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2010 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2008 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2007 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2006 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2005 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S0801; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).

The COVID-19 pandemic lockdown worldwide provided a unique research opportunity for ecologists to investigate the human-wildlife relationship under abrupt changes in human mobility, also known as Anthropause. Here we chose 15 common non-migratory bird species with different levels of synanthrope and we aimed to compare how human mobility changes could influence the occupancy of fully synanthropic species such as House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) versus casual to tangential synanthropic species such as White-breasted Nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis). We extracted data from the eBird citizen science project during three study periods in the spring and summer of 2020 when human mobility changed unevenly across different counties in North Carolina. We used the COVID-19 Community Mobility reports from Google to examine how community mobility changes towards workplaces, an indicator of overall human movements at the county level, could influence bird occupancy. Methods The data source we used for bird data was eBird, a global citizen science project run by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. We used the COVID-19 Community Mobility Reports by Google to represent the pause of human activities at the county level in North Carolina. These data are publicly available and were last updated on 10/15/2022. We used forest land cover data from NC One Map that has a high resolution (1-meter pixel) raster data from 2016 imagery to represent canopy cover at each eBird checklist location. We also used the raster data of the 2019 National Land Cover Database to represent the degree of development/impervious surface at each eBird checklist location. All three measurements were used for the highest resolution that was available to use. We downloaded the eBird Basic Dataset (EBD) that contains the 15 study species from February to June 2020. We also downloaded the sampling event data that contains the checklist efforts information. First, we used the R package Auk (version 0.6.0) in R (version 4.2.1) to filter data in the following conditions: (1) Date: 02/19/2020 - 03/29/2020; (2) Checklist type: stationary; (3) Complete checklist; (4) Time: 07:00 am - 06:00 pm; (5) Checklist duration: 5-20 mins; (6) Location: North Carolina. After filtering data, we used the zero fill function from Auk to create detection/non-detection data of each study species in NC. Then we used the repeat visits filter from Auk to filter eBird checklist locations where at least 2 checklists (max 10 checklists) have been submitted to the same location by the same observer, allowing us to create a hierarchical data frame where both detection and state process can be analyzed using Occupancy Modeling. This data frame was in a matrix format that each row represents a sampling location and the columns represent the detection and non-detection of the 2-10 repeat sampling events. For the Google Community Mobility data, we chose the “Workplaces” categoriy of mobility data to analyze the Anthropause effect because it was highly relevant to the pause of human activities in urban areas. The mobility data from Google is a percentage change compared to a baseline for each day. A baseline day represents a normal value for the day of the week from the 5-week period (01/03/2020-02/06/2020). For example, a mobility value of -30.0 for Wake County on Apr 15, 2020, means the overall mobility in Wake County on that day decreased by 30% compared to the baseline day a few months ago. Because the eBird data we used covers a wider range of dates rather than each day, we took the average value of mobility before lockdown, during lockdown, and after lockdown in each county in NC. For the environmental variables, we calculated the values in ArcGIS Pro (version 3.1.0). We created a 200 m buffer at each eligible eBird checklist location. For the forest cover data, we used “Zonal Statistics as Table” to extract the percentage of forest cover at each checklist location’s 200-meter circular buffer. For the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) data, we combined low-intensity, medium-intensity, and high-intensity development as development covers and used “Summarize Within” to extract the percentage of development cover using the polygon version of NLCD. We used a correlation matrix of the three predictors (workplace mobility, percent forest cover, and percent development cover) and found no co-linearity. Thus, these three predictors plus the interaction between workplace mobility and percent development cover were the site covariates of the Occupancy Models. For the detection covariates, four predictors were considered including time of observation, checklist duration, number of observers, and workplace mobility. These detection covariates were also not highly correlated. We then merged all data into an unmarked data frame using the “unmarked” R package (version 1.2.5). The unmarked data frame has eBird sampling locations as sites (rows in the data frame) and repeat checklists at the same sampling locations as repeat visits (columns in the data frame).

Of businesses or organizations where at least one employee was laid off, percentage of workforce laid off and rehired due to COVID-19, by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), business employment size, type of business, business activity and majority ownership.