About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the mean household income for each of the five quintiles in Middle Inlet, Wisconsin, as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau. The dataset highlights the variation in mean household income across quintiles, offering valuable insights into income distribution and inequality.

Key observations

• Income disparities: The mean income of the lowest quintile (20% of households with the lowest income) is 21,360, while the mean income for the highest quintile (20% of households with the highest income) is 162,915. This indicates that the top earners earn 8 times compared to the lowest earners.
• *Top 5%: * The mean household income for the wealthiest population (top 5%) is 282,509, which is 173.41% higher compared to the highest quintile, and 1322.61% higher compared to the lowest quintile.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Income Levels:

• Lowest Quintile
• Second Quintile
• Third Quintile
• Fourth Quintile
• Highest Quintile
• Top 5 Percent

Variables / Data Columns

• Income Level: This column showcases the income levels (As mentioned above).
• Mean Household Income: Mean household income, in 2022 inflation-adjusted dollars for the specific income level.

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/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Middle Inlet town median household income. You can refer the same here

This dataset and map service provides information on the U.S. Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) low to moderate income areas. The term Low to Moderate Income, often referred to as low-mod, has a specific programmatic context within the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. Over a 1, 2, or 3-year period, as selected by the grantee, not less than 70 percent of CDBG funds must be used for activities that benefit low- and moderate-income persons. HUD uses special tabulations of Census data to determine areas where at least 51% of households have incomes at or below 80% of the area median income (AMI). This dataset and map service contains the following layer.

United States US: Income Share Held by Highest 20% data was reported at 46.900 % in 2016. This records an increase from the previous number of 46.400 % for 2013. United States US: Income Share Held by Highest 20% data is updated yearly, averaging 46.000 % from Dec 1979 (Median) to 2016, with 11 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 46.900 % in 2016 and a record low of 41.200 % in 1979. United States US: Income Share Held by Highest 20% data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Poverty. Percentage share of income or consumption is the share that accrues to subgroups of population indicated by deciles or quintiles. Percentage shares by quintile may not sum to 100 because of rounding.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.

Income statistics by economic family type and income source, annual.

United States US: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data was reported at 30.600 % in 2016. This records an increase from the previous number of 30.100 % for 2013. United States US: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data is updated yearly, averaging 30.100 % from Dec 1979 (Median) to 2016, with 11 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 30.600 % in 2016 and a record low of 25.300 % in 1979. United States US: Income Share Held by Highest 10% data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Poverty. Percentage share of income or consumption is the share that accrues to subgroups of population indicated by deciles or quintiles.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.

Abstract

Dataset used in World Bank Policy Research Working Paper #2876, published in World Bank Economic Review, No. 1, 2005, pp. 21-44.

The effects of globalization on income distribution in rich and poor countries are a matter of controversy. While international trade theory in its most abstract formulation implies that increased trade and foreign investment should make income distribution more equal in poor countries and less equal in rich countries, finding these effects has proved elusive. The author presents another attempt to discern the effects of globalization by using data from household budget surveys and looking at the impact of openness and foreign direct investment on relative income shares of low and high deciles. The author finds some evidence that at very low average income levels, it is the rich who benefit from openness. As income levels rise to those of countries such as Chile, Colombia, or Czech Republic, for example, the situation changes, and it is the relative income of the poor and the middle class that rises compared with the rich. It seems that openness makes income distribution worse before making it better-or differently in that the effect of openness on a country's income distribution depends on the country's initial income level.

Kind of data

Aggregate data [agg]

This dataset contains replication files for "The Fading American Dream: Trends in Absolute Income Mobility Since 1940" by Raj Chetty, David Grusky, Maximilian Hell, Nathaniel Hendren, Robert Manduca, and Jimmy Narang. For more information, see https://opportunityinsights.org/paper/the-fading-american-dream/. A summary of the related publication follows. One of the defining features of the “American Dream” is the ideal that children have a higher standard of living than their parents. We assess whether the U.S. is living up to this ideal by estimating rates of “absolute income mobility” – the fraction of children who earn more than their parents – since 1940. We measure absolute mobility by comparing children’s household incomes at age 30 (adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index) with their parents’ household incomes at age 30. We find that rates of absolute mobility have fallen from approximately 90% for children born in 1940 to 50% for children born in the 1980s. Absolute income mobility has fallen across the entire income distribution, with the largest declines for families in the middle class. These findings are unaffected by using alternative price indices to adjust for inflation, accounting for taxes and transfers, measuring income at later ages, and adjusting for changes in household size. Absolute mobility fell in all 50 states, although the rate of decline varied, with the largest declines concentrated in states in the industrial Midwest, such as Michigan and Illinois. The decline in absolute mobility is especially steep – from 95% for children born in 1940 to 41% for children born in 1984 – when we compare the sons’ earnings to their fathers’ earnings. Why have rates of upward income mobility fallen so sharply over the past half-century? There have been two important trends that have affected the incomes of children born in the 1980s relative to those born in the 1940s and 1950s: lower Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rates and greater inequality in the distribution of growth. We find that most of the decline in absolute mobility is driven by the more unequal distribution of economic growth rather than the slowdown in aggregate growth rates. When we simulate an economy that restores GDP growth to the levels experienced in the 1940s and 1950s but distributes that growth across income groups as it is distributed today, absolute mobility only increases to 62%. In contrast, maintaining GDP at its current level but distributing it more broadly across income groups – at it was distributed for children born in the 1940s – would increase absolute mobility to 80%, thereby reversing more than two-thirds of the decline in absolute mobility. These findings show that higher growth rates alone are insufficient to restore absolute mobility to the levels experienced in mid-century America. Under the current distribution of GDP, we would need real GDP growth rates above 6% per year to return to rates of absolute mobility in the 1940s. Intuitively, because a large fraction of GDP goes to a small fraction of high-income households today, higher GDP growth does not substantially increase the number of children who earn more than their parents. Of course, this does not mean that GDP growth does not matter: changing the distribution of growth naturally has smaller effects on absolute mobility when there is very little growth to be distributed. The key point is that increasing absolute mobility substantially would require more broad-based economic growth. We conclude that absolute mobility has declined sharply in America over the past half-century primarily because of the growth in inequality. If one wants to revive the “American Dream” of high rates of absolute mobility, one must have an interest in growth that is shared more broadly across the income distribution.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. The broad aim of the research is to investigate the social and economic consequences of the middle class settlement of inner London in recent decades in order to assess whether there are variations between different areas. A subsidiary aim will be to investigate the relationships between the middle class and other social groups in these neighbourhoods and whether, if these differ, the quality of these relationships can be related to the area and the social composition of the groups involved. Have the middle class exacerbated social exclusion in the city as some claim (Smith 1996)? At the heart of the research proposal is the assumption is that it is no longer possible to identify a single middle class and that different groups will have different social, economic, political and cultural interests and, for this reason, will have different relationships to their localities and populations. More specific objectives are: to identify what are the dominant patterns of middle-class settlement in inner London and how these are differentiated - by occupational characteristics, by social background, or by age-cohort; to identify the consequences of middle class settlement particularly in terms of networks, patterns of sociation, the relations between work and non work associations; to investigate to what extent these social and possibly economic interactions involve other social groups and if so how these variations might be explained; to identify if possible what one area might learn from another - in other words, are there policy recommendations that can be made to improve the attractiveness of some areas and minimize their negativities?

Income of individuals by age group, sex and income source, Canada, provinces and selected census metropolitan areas, annual.

By the middle of the 1990s, Indonesia had enjoyed over three decades of remarkable social, economic, and demographic change and was on the cusp of joining the middle-income countries. Per capita income had risen more than fifteenfold since the early 1960s, from around US$50 to more than US$800. Increases in educational attainment and decreases in fertility and infant mortality over the same period reflected impressive investments in infrastructure. In the late 1990s the economic outlook began to change as Indonesia was gripped by the economic crisis that affected much of Asia. In 1998 the rupiah collapsed, the economy went into a tailspin, and gross domestic product contracted by an estimated 12-15%-a decline rivaling the magnitude of the Great Depression. The general trend of several decades of economic progress followed by a few years of economic downturn masks considerable variation across the archipelago in the degree both of economic development and of economic setbacks related to the crisis. In part this heterogeneity reflects the great cultural and ethnic diversity of Indonesia, which in turn makes it a rich laboratory for research on a number of individual- and household-level behaviors and outcomes that interest social scientists. The Indonesia Family Life Survey is designed to provide data for studying behaviors and outcomes. The survey contains a wealth of information collected at the individual and household levels, including multiple indicators of economic and non-economic well-being: consumption, income, assets, education, migration, labor market outcomes, marriage, fertility, contraceptive use, health status, use of health care and health insurance, relationships among co-resident and non- resident family members, processes underlying household decision-making, transfers among family members and participation in community activities. In addition to individual- and household-level information, the IFLS provides detailed information from the communities in which IFLS households are located and from the facilities that serve residents of those communities. These data cover aspects of the physical and social environment, infrastructure, employment opportunities, food prices, access to health and educational facilities, and the quality and prices of services available at those facilities. By linking data from IFLS households to data from their communities, users can address many important questions regarding the impact of policies on the lives of the respondents, as well as document the effects of social, economic, and environmental change on the population. The Indonesia Family Life Survey complements and extends the existing survey data available for Indonesia, and for developing countries in general, in a number of ways. First, relatively few large-scale longitudinal surveys are available for developing countries. IFLS is the only large-scale longitudinal survey available for Indonesia. Because data are available for the same individuals from multiple points in time, IFLS affords an opportunity to understand the dynamics of behavior, at the individual, household and family and community levels. In IFLS1 7,224 households were interviewed, and detailed individual-level data were collected from over 22,000 individuals. In IFLS2, 94.4% of IFLS1 households were re-contacted (interviewed or died). In IFLS3 the re-contact rate was 95.3% of IFLS1 households. Indeed nearly 91% of IFLS1 households are complete panel households in that they were interviewed in all three waves, IFLS1, 2 and 3. These re-contact rates are as high as or higher than most longitudinal surveys in the United States and Europe. High re-interview rates were obtained in part because we were committed to tracking and interviewing individuals who had moved or split off from the origin IFLS1 households. High re-interview rates contribute significantly to data quality in a longitudinal survey because they lessen the risk of bias due to nonrandom attrition in studies using the data. Second, the multipurpose nature of IFLS instruments means that the data support analyses of interrelated issues not possible with single-purpose surveys. For example, the availability of data on household consumption together with detailed individual data on labor market outcomes, health outcomes and on health program availability and quality at the community level means that one can examine the impact of income on health outcomes, but also whether health in turn affects incomes. Third, IFLS collected both current and retrospective information on most topics. With data from multiple points of time on current status and an extensive array of retrospective information about the lives of respondents, analysts can relate dynamics to events that occurred in the past. For example, changes in labor outcomes in recent years can be explored as a function of earlier decisions about schooling and work. Fourth, IFLS collected extensive measures of health status, including self-reported measures of general health status, morbidity experience, and physical assessments conducted by a nurse (height, weight, head circumference, blood pressure, pulse, waist and hip circumference, hemoglobin level, lung capacity, and time required to repeatedly rise from a sitting position). These data provide a much richer picture of health status than is typically available in household surveys. For example, the data can be used to explore relationships between socioeconomic status and an array of health outcomes. Fifth, in all waves of the survey, detailed data were collected about respondents¹ communities and public and private facilities available for their health care and schooling. The facility data can be combined with household and individual data to examine the relationship between, for example, access to health services (or changes in access) and various aspects of health care use and health status. Sixth, because the waves of IFLS span the period from several years before the economic crisis hit Indonesia, to just prior to it hitting, to one year and then three years after, extensive research can be carried out regarding the living conditions of Indonesian households during this very tumultuous period. In sum, the breadth and depth of the longitudinal information on individuals, households, communities, and facilities make IFLS data a unique resource for scholars and policymakers interested in the processes of economic development.

Will all children be able to read by 2030? The ability to read with comprehension is a foundational skill that every education system around the world strives to impart by late in primary school—generally by age 10. Moreover, attaining the ambitious Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in education requires first achieving this basic building block, and so does improving countries’ Human Capital Index scores. Yet past evidence from many low- and middle-income countries has shown that many children are not learning to read with comprehension in primary school. To understand the global picture better, we have worked with the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) to assemble a new dataset with the most comprehensive measures of this foundational skill yet developed, by linking together data from credible cross-national and national assessments of reading. This dataset covers 115 countries, accounting for 81% of children worldwide and 79% of children in low- and middle-income countries. The new data allow us to estimate the reading proficiency of late-primary-age children, and we also provide what are among the first estimates (and the most comprehensive, for low- and middle-income countries) of the historical rate of progress in improving reading proficiency globally (for the 2000-17 period). The results show that 53% of all children in low- and middle-income countries cannot read age-appropriate material by age 10, and that at current rates of improvement, this “learning poverty” rate will have fallen only to 43% by 2030. Indeed, we find that the goal of all children reading by 2030 will be attainable only with historically unprecedented progress. The high rate of “learning poverty” and slow progress in low- and middle-income countries is an early warning that all the ambitious SDG targets in education (and likely of social progress) are at risk. Based on this evidence, we suggest a new medium-term target to guide the World Bank’s work in low- and middle- income countries: cut learning poverty by at least half by 2030. This target, together with improved measurement of learning, can be as an evidence-based tool to accelerate progress to get all children reading by age 10. For further details, please refer to https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/e52f55322528903b27f1b7e61238e416-0200022022/original/Learning-poverty-report-2022-06-21-final-V7-0-conferenceEdition.pdf

Estimates of annual household income for the four income types for Middle layer Super Output Areas, or local areas, in England and Wales.

This dataset measures food availability and access for 76 low- and middle-income countries. The dataset includes annual country-level data on area, yield, production, nonfood use, trade, and consumption for grains and root and tuber crops (combined as R&T in the documentation tables), food aid, total value of imports and exports, gross domestic product, and population compiled from a variety of sources. This dataset is the basis for the International Food Security Assessment 2015-2025 released in June 2015. This annual ERS report projects food availability and access for 76 low- and middle-income countries over a 10-year period. Countries (Spatial Description, continued): Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Moldova, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: CSV File for all years and all countries. File Name: gfa25.csvResource Title: International Food Security country data. File Name: GrainDemandProduction.xlsxResource Description: Excel files of individual country data. Please note that these files provide the data in a different layout from the CSV file. This version of the data files was updated 9-2-2021

More up-to-date files may be found at: https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/international-food-security.aspx

Namibia NA: Imports: Low- and Middle-Income Economies: % of Total Goods Imports: Within Region data was reported at 69.420 % in 2016. This records a decrease from the previous number of 71.557 % for 2015. Namibia NA: Imports: Low- and Middle-Income Economies: % of Total Goods Imports: Within Region data is updated yearly, averaging 77.959 % from Dec 2000 (Median) to 2016, with 17 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 86.783 % in 2004 and a record low of 62.161 % in 2014. Namibia NA: Imports: Low- and Middle-Income Economies: % of Total Goods Imports: Within Region data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Namibia – Table NA.World Bank: Imports. Merchandise imports from low- and middle-income economies within region are the sum of merchandise imports by the reporting economy from other low- and middle-income economies in the same World Bank region according to the World Bank classification of economies. Data are as a percentage of total merchandise imports by the economy. Data are computed only if at least half of the economies in the partner country group had non-missing data. No figures are shown for high-income economies, because they are a separate category in the World Bank classification of economies.; ; World Bank staff estimates based data from International Monetary Fund's Direction of Trade database.; Weighted average;

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents median income data over a decade or more for males and females categorized by Total, Full-Time Year-Round (FT), and Part-Time (PT) employment in Middle Point. It showcases annual income, providing insights into gender-specific income distributions and the disparities between full-time and part-time work. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based pay disparity trends and explore the variations in income for male and female individuals.

Key observations: Insights from 2023

Based on our analysis ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates, we present the following observations: - All workers, aged 15 years and older: In Middle Point, the median income for all workers aged 15 years and older, regardless of work hours, was $41,786 for males and $27,375 for females.

These income figures highlight a substantial gender-based income gap in Middle Point. Women, regardless of work hours, earn 66 cents for each dollar earned by men. This significant gender pay gap, approximately 34%, underscores concerning gender-based income inequality in the village of Middle Point.

- Full-time workers, aged 15 years and older: In Middle Point, among full-time, year-round workers aged 15 years and older, males earned a median income of $56,513, while females earned $40,167, leading to a 29% gender pay gap among full-time workers. This illustrates that women earn 71 cents for each dollar earned by men in full-time roles. This analysis indicates a widening gender pay gap, showing a substantial income disparity where women, despite working full-time, face a more significant wage discrepancy compared to men in the same roles.

Surprisingly, the gender pay gap percentage was higher across all roles, including non-full-time employment, for women compared to men. This suggests that full-time employment offers a more equitable income scenario for women compared to other employment patterns in Middle Point.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. All incomes have been adjusting for inflation and are presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars.

Gender classifications include:

• Male
• Female

Employment type classifications include:

• Full-time, year-round: A full-time, year-round worker is a person who worked full time (35 or more hours per week) and 50 or more weeks during the previous calendar year.
• Part-time: A part-time worker is a person who worked less than 35 hours per week during the previous calendar year.

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column presents the data year. Expected values are 2010 to 2023
• Male Total Income: Annual median income, for males regardless of work hours
• Male FT Income: Annual median income, for males working full time, year-round
• Male PT Income: Annual median income, for males working part time
• Female Total Income: Annual median income, for females regardless of work hours
• Female FT Income: Annual median income, for females working full time, year-round
• Female PT Income: Annual median income, for females working part time

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/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Middle Point median household income by race. You can refer the same here

United Arab Emirates AE: Income Share Held by Highest 20% data was reported at 38.200 % in 2014. United Arab Emirates AE: Income Share Held by Highest 20% data is updated yearly, averaging 38.200 % from Dec 2014 (Median) to 2014, with 1 observations. United Arab Emirates AE: Income Share Held by Highest 20% data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United Arab Emirates – Table AE.World Bank.WDI: Poverty. Percentage share of income or consumption is the share that accrues to subgroups of population indicated by deciles or quintiles. Percentage shares by quintile may not sum to 100 because of rounding.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.

The United States President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has been credited with saving millions lives and helping to change the trajectory of the global human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic. This study assesses whether PEPFAR has had impacts beyond health by examining changes in five economic and educational outcomes in PEPFAR countries: the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita growth rate; the share of girls and share of boys, respectively, who are out of school; and female and male employment rates. We constructed a panel data set for 157 low- and middle-income countries between 1990 and 2018 to estimate the macroeconomic impacts of PEPFAR. Our PEPFAR group included 90 countries that had received PEPFAR support over the period. Our comparison group included 67 low- and middle-income countries that had not received any PEPFAR support or had received minimal PEPFAR support (

Model-based estimates of the proportion of households with mean weekly income lower than 60% of the national median weekly income, by middle layer super output area, England and Wales.

The United States President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has been credited with saving millions lives and helping to change the trajectory of the global human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic. This study assesses whether PEPFAR has had impacts beyond health by examining changes in five economic and educational outcomes in PEPFAR countries: the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita growth rate; the share of girls and share of boys, respectively, who are out of school; and female and male employment rates. We constructed a panel data set for 157 low- and middle-income countries between 1990 and 2018 to estimate the macroeconomic impacts of PEPFAR. Our PEPFAR group included 90 countries that had received PEPFAR support over the period. Our comparison group included 67 low- and middle-income countries that had not received any PEPFAR support or had received minimal PEPFAR support (

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents a breakdown of households across various income brackets in Middle River, MN, as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau. The Census Bureau classifies households into different categories, including total households, family households, and non-family households. Our analysis of U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey data for Middle River, MN reveals how household income distribution varies among these categories. The dataset highlights the variation in number of households with income, offering valuable insights into the distribution of Middle River households based on income levels.

Key observations

• For Family Households: In Middle River, the majority of family households, representing 35.19%, earn $75,000 to $99,999, showcasing a substantial share of the community families falling within this income bracket. Conversely, the minority of family households, comprising 0.0%, have incomes falling $45,000 to $49,999, representing a smaller but still significant segment of the community.
• For Non-Family Households: In Middle River, the majority of non-family households, accounting for 26.58%, have income $100,000 to $124,999, indicating that a substantial portion of non-family households falls within this income bracket. On the other hand, the minority of non-family households, comprising 0.0%, earn $45,000 to $49,999, representing a smaller, yet notable, portion of non-family households in the community.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Income Levels:

• Less than $10,000
• $10,000 to $14,999
• $15,000 to $19,999
• $20,000 to $24,999
• $25,000 to $29,999
• $30,000 to $34,999
• $35,000 to $39,999
• $40,000 to $44,999
• $45,000 to $49,999
• $50,000 to $59,999
• $60,000 to $74,999
• $75,000 to $99,999
• $125,000 to $149,999
• $150,000 to $199,999
• $200,000 or more

Variables / Data Columns

• Income Level: The income level represents the income brackets ranging from Less than $10,000 to $200,000 or more in Middle River, MN (As mentioned above).
• All Households: Count of households for the specified income level
• % All Households: Percentage of households at the specified income level relative to the total households in Middle River, MN
• Family Households: Count of family households for the specified income level
• % Family Households: Percentage of family households at the specified income level relative to the total family households in Middle River, MN
• Non-Family Households: Count of non-family households for the specified income level
• % Non-Family Households: Percentage of non-family households at the specified income level relative to the total non-family households in Middle River, MN

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/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Middle River median household income. You can refer the same here