The Distributional Financial Accounts (DFAs) provide a quarterly measure of the distribution of U.S. household wealth since 1989, based on a comprehensive integration of disaggregated household-level wealth data with official aggregate wealth measures. The data set contains the level and share of each balance sheet item on the Financial Accounts' household wealth table (Table B.101.h), for various sub-populations in the United States. In our core data set, aggregate household wealth is allocated to each of four percentile groups of wealth: the top 1 percent, the next 9 percent (i.e., 90th to 99th percentile), the next 40 percent (50th to 90th percentile), and the bottom half (below the 50th percentile). Additionally, the data set contains the level and share of aggregate household wealth by income, age, generation, education, and race. The quarterly frequency makes the data useful for studying the business cycle dynamics of wealth concentration--which are typically difficult to observe in lower-frequency data because peaks and troughs often fall between times of measurement. These data will be updated about 10 or 11 weeks after the end of each quarter, making them a timely measure of the distribution of wealth.

Abstract

The Health Inequality Project uses big data to measure differences in life expectancy by income across areas and identify strategies to improve health outcomes for low-income Americans.

Section 7

This table reports life expectancy point estimates and standard errors for men and women at age 40 for each percentile of the national income distribution. Both race-adjusted and unadjusted estimates are reported.

Source

Section 13

This table reports life expectancy point estimates and standard errors for men and women at age 40 for each percentile of the national income distribution separately by year. Both race-adjusted and unadjusted estimates are reported.

Source

Section 6

This dataset was created on 2020-01-10 18:53:00.508 by merging multiple datasets together. The source datasets for this version were:

Commuting Zone Life Expectancy Estimates by year: CZ-level by-year life expectancy estimates for men and women, by income quartile

Commuting Zone Life Expectancy: Commuting zone (CZ)-level life expectancy estimates for men and women, by income quartile

Commuting Zone Life Expectancy Trends: CZ-level estimates of trends in life expectancy for men and women, by income quartile

Commuting Zone Characteristics: CZ-level characteristics

Commuting Zone Life Expectancy for larger populations: CZ-level life expectancy estimates for men and women, by income ventile

Section 15

This table reports life expectancy point estimates and standard errors for men and women at age 40 for each quartile of the national income distribution by state of residence and year. Both race-adjusted and unadjusted estimates are reported.

Source

Section 11

This table reports US mortality rates by gender, age, year and household income percentile. Household incomes are measured two years prior to the mortality rate for mortality rates at ages 40-63, and at age 61 for mortality rates at ages 64-76. The “lag” variable indicates the number of years between measurement of income and mortality.

Observations with 1 or 2 deaths have been masked: all mortality rates that reflect only 1 or 2 deaths have been recoded to reflect 3 deaths

Source

Section 3

This table reports coefficients and standard errors from regressions of life expectancy estimates for men and women at age 40 for each quartile of the national income distribution on calendar year by commuting zone of residence. Only the slope coefficient, representing the average increase or decrease in life expectancy per year, is reported. Trend estimates for both race-adjusted and unadjusted life expectancies are reported. Estimates are reported for the 100 largest CZs (populations greater than 590,000) only.

Source

Section 9

This table reports life expectancy estimates at age 40 for Males and Females for all countries. Source: World Health Organization, accessed at: http://apps.who.int/gho/athena/

Source

Section 10

This table reports life expectancy point estimates and standard errors for men and women at age 40 for each quartile of the national income distribution by county of residence. Both race-adjusted and unadjusted estimates are reported. Estimates are reported for counties with populations larger than 25,000 only

Source

Section 2

This table reports life expectancy point estimates and standard errors for men and women at age 40 for each quartile of the national income distribution by commuting zone of residence and year. Both race-adjusted and unadjusted estimates are reported. Estimates are reported for the 100 largest CZs (populations greater than 590,000) only.

Source

Section 8

This table reports US population and death counts by age, year, and sex from various sources. Counts labelled “dm1” are derived from the Social Security Administration Data Master 1 file. Counts labelled “irs” are derived from tax data. Counts labelled “cdc” are derived from NCHS life tables.

Source

Section 12

This table reports numerous county characteristics, compiled from various sources. These characteristics are described in the county life expectancy table.

Two variables constructed by the Cen

This table describes the wealth distribution of the sector households in the national accounts over different household groups. Households are identified by main source of income, living situation, household composition, age classes of the head of the household, income class by 20% groups, and net worth class by 20% groups.

Data available from: 2015.

Status of the figures: All data are provisional.

Changes as of October 19th 2023: The figures of 2015-2020 are revised, because national accounts figures are changed due to the revision policy of Statistics Netherlands. Results for 2021 are added to the table.

When will new figures be published? New figures will be released in October 2024.

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

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Executive Order on Environmental Justice (#12898) do not provide specific guidance to evaluate EJ issues within a region's transportation planning process. Therefore, MPOs must devise their own methods for ensuring that EJ issues are investigated and evaluated in transportation decision-making. In 2001, DVRPC developed an EJ technical assessment to identify direct and disparate impacts of its plans, programs, and planning process on defined population groups in the Delaware Valley region. This assessment, called the Indicators of Potential Disadvantage Methodology, is utilized in a variety of DVRPC plans and programs. DVRPC currently assesses the following population groups, defined by the U.S. Census Bureau:YouthOlder AdultsFemaleRacial MinorityEthnic MinorityForeign-BornDisabledLimited English ProficiencyLow-IncomeCensus tables used to gather data from the 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year EstimatesUsing U.S. Census American Community Survey data, the population groups listed above are identified and located at the census tract level. Data is gathered at the regional level, combining populations from each of the nine counties, for either individuals or households, depending on the indicator. From there, the total number of persons in each demographic group is divided by the appropriate universe (either population or households) for the nine-county region, providing a regional average for that population group. Any census tract that meets or exceeds the regional average level, or threshold, is considered an EJ-sensitive tract for that group.Census tables used to gather data from the 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.For more information and for methodology, visit DVRPC's website:http://www.dvrpc.org/GetInvolved/TitleVI/For technical documentation visit DVRPC's GitHub IPD repo: https://github.com/dvrpc/ipdSource of tract boundaries: 2020 US Census Bureau, TIGER/Line ShapefilesNote: Tracts with null values should be symbolized as "Insufficient or No Data".Data Dictionary for Attributes:(Source = DVRPC indicates a calculated field)FieldAliasDescriptionSourceyearIPD analysis yearDVRPCgeoid2011-digit tract GEOIDCensus tract identifierACS 5-yearstatefp2-digit state GEOIDFIPS Code for StateACS 5-yearcountyfp3-digit county GEOIDFIPS Code for CountyACS 5-yeartractceTract numberTract NumberACS 5-yearnameTract numberCensus tract identifier with decimal placesACS 5-yearnamelsadTract nameCensus tract name with decimal placesACS 5-yeard_classDisabled percentile classClassification of tract's disabled percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedd_estDisabled count estimateEstimated count of disabled populationACS 5-yeard_est_moeDisabled count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of disabled populationACS 5-yeard_pctDisabled percent estimateEstimated percentage of disabled populationACS 5-yeard_pct_moeDisabled percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of disabled populationACS 5-yeard_pctileDisabled percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage disabledcalculatedd_scoreDisabled percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's disabled classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedem_classEthnic minority percentile classClassification of tract's Hispanic/Latino percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedem_estEthnic minority count estimateEstimated count of Hispanic/Latino populationACS 5-yearem_est_moeEthnic minority count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of Hispanic/Latino populationACS 5-yearem_pctEthnic minority percent estimateEstimated percentage of Hispanic/Latino populationcalculatedem_pct_moeEthnic minority percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of Hispanic/Latino populationcalculatedem_pctileEthnic minority percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage Hispanic/Latinocalculatedem_scoreEthnic minority percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's Hispanic/Latino classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedf_classFemale percentile classClassification of tract's female percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedf_estFemale count estimateEstimated count of female populationACS 5-yearf_est_moeFemale count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of female populationACS 5-yearf_pctFemale percent estimateEstimated percentage of female populationACS 5-yearf_pct_moeFemale percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of female populationACS 5-yearf_pctileFemale percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage femalecalculatedf_scoreFemale percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's female classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedfb_classForeign-born percentile classClassification of tract's foreign born percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedfb_estForeign-born count estimateEstimated count of foreign born populationACS 5-yearfb_est_moeForeign-born count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of foreign born populationACS 5-yearfb_pctForeign-born percent estimateEstimated percentage of foreign born populationcalculatedfb_pct_moeForeign-born percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of foreign born populationcalculatedfb_pctileForeign-born percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage foreign borncalculatedfb_scoreForeign-born percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's foreign born classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedle_classLimited English proficiency percentile classClassification of tract's limited english proficiency percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedle_estLimited English proficiency count estimateEstimated count of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-yearle_est_moeLimited English proficiency count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-yearle_pctLimited English proficiency percent estimateEstimated percentage of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-yearle_pct_moeLimited English proficiency percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of limited english proficiency populationACS 5-yearle_pctileLimited English proficiency percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage limited english proficiencycalculatedle_scoreLimited English proficiency percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's limited english proficiency classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedli_classLow-income percentile classClassification of tract's low income percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedli_estLow-income count estimateEstimated count of low income (below 200% of poverty level) populationACS 5-yearli_est_moeLow-income count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of low income populationACS 5-yearli_pctLow-income percent estimateEstimated percentage of low income (below 200% of poverty level) populationcalculatedli_pct_moeLow-income percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of low income populationcalculatedli_pctileLow-income percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage low incomecalculatedli_scoreLow-income percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's low income classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedoa_classOlder adult percentile classClassification of tract's older adult percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedoa_estOlder adult count estimateEstimated count of older adult population (65 years or older)ACS 5-yearoa_est_moeOlder adult count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of older adult populationACS 5-yearoa_pctOlder adult percent estimateEstimated percentage of older adult population (65 years or older)ACS 5-yearoa_pct_moeOlder adult percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of older adult populationACS 5-yearoa_pctileOlder adult percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage older adultcalculatedoa_scoreOlder adult percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's older adult classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedrm_classRacial minority percentile classClassification of tract's non-white percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedrm_estRacial minority count estimateEstimated count of non-white populationACS 5-yearrm_est_moeRacial minority count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of non-white populationACS 5-yearrm_pctRacial minority percent estimateEstimated percentage of non-white populationcalculatedrm_pct_moeRacial minority percent margin of errorMargin of error for percentage of non-white populationcalculatedrm_pctileRacial minority percentileTract's regional percentile for percentage non-whitecalculatedrm_scoreRacial minority percentile scoreCorresponding numeric score for tract's non-white classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4calculatedtot_ppTotal population estimateEstimated total population of tract (universe [or denominator] for youth, older adult, female, racial minoriry, ethnic minority, & foreign born)ACS 5-yeartot_pp_moeTotal population margin of errorMargin of error for estimated total population of tractACS 5-yeary_classYouth percentile classClassification of tract's youth percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above averagecalculatedy_estYouth count estimateEstimated count of youth population (under 18 years)ACS 5-yeary_est_moeYouth count margin of errorMargin of error for estimated count of youth populationACS 5-yeary_pctYouth population percentage estimateEstimated percentage of youth population (under 18 years)calculatedy_pct_moeYouth population percentage margin of

This table contains 58320 series, with data for years 1999 - 2016 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years). This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (20 items: Canada; Atlantic; Newfoundland and Labrador; Prince Edward Island; ...); Assets and debts (27 items: Total assets; Private pension assets; Registered Retirement Savings Plans (RRSPs), Registered Retirement Income Funds (RRIFs), Locked-in Retirement Accounts (LIRAs) and other; Employer-sponsored Registered Pension Plans (EPPs); ...); Net worth quintiles (6 items: Total, all net worth quintiles; Lowest net worth quintile; Second net worth quintile; Middle net worth quintile; ...); Statistics (6 items: Total values; Percentage of total assets or total debts; Number holding asset or debt; Percentage holding asset or debt; ...); Confidence intervals (3 items: Estimate; Lower bound of a 95% confidence interval; Upper bound of a 95% confidence interval).

This table presents income shares, thresholds, tax shares, and total counts of individual Canadian tax filers, with a focus on high income individuals (95% income threshold, 99% threshold, etc.). Income thresholds are based on national threshold values, regardless of selected geography; for example, the number of Nova Scotians in the top 1% will be calculated as the number of taxfiling Nova Scotians whose total income exceeded the 99% national income threshold. Different definitions of income are available in the table namely market, total, and after-tax income, both with and without capital gains.

This dataset contains estimates of the socioeconomic status (SES) position of each of 149 countries covering the period 1880-2010. Measures of SES, which are in decades, allow for a 130 year time-series analysis of the changing position of countries in the global status hierarchy. SES scores are the average of each country’s income and education ranking and are reported as percentile rankings ranging from 1-99. As such, they can be interpreted similarly to other percentile rankings, such has high school standardized test scores. If country A has an SES score of 55, for example, it indicates that 55 percent of the countries in this dataset have a lower average income and education ranking than country A. ISO alpha and numeric country codes are included to allow users to merge these data with other variables, such as those found in the World Bank’s World Development Indicators Database and the United Nations Common Database.

See here for a working example of how the data might be used to better understand how the world came to look the way it does, at least in terms of status position of countries.

VARIABLE DESCRIPTIONS:

unid: ISO numeric country code (used by the United Nations)

wbid: ISO alpha country code (used by the World Bank)

SES: Country socioeconomic status score (percentile) based on GDP per capita and educational attainment (n=174)

country: Short country name

year: Survey year

gdppc: GDP per capita: Single time-series (imputed)

yrseduc: Completed years of education in the adult (15+) population

region5: Five category regional coding schema

regionUN: United Nations regional coding schema

DATA SOURCES:

The dataset was compiled by Shawn Dorius (sdorius@iastate.edu) from a large number of data sources, listed below. GDP per Capita:

1. Maddison, Angus. 2004. 'The World Economy: Historical Statistics'. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development: Paris. GDP & GDP per capita data in (1990 Geary-Khamis dollars, PPPs of currencies and average prices of commodities). Maddison data collected from: http://www.ggdc.net/MADDISON/Historical_Statistics/horizontal-file_02-2010.xls.

2. World Development Indicators Database Years of Education 1. Morrisson and Murtin.2009. 'The Century of Education'. Journal of Human Capital(3)1:1-42. Data downloaded from http://www.fabricemurtin.com/ 2. Cohen, Daniel & Marcelo Cohen. 2007. 'Growth and human capital: Good data, good results' Journal of economic growth 12(1):51-76. Data downloaded from http://soto.iae-csic.org/Data.htm

3. Barro, Robert and Jong-Wha Lee, 2013, "A New Data Set of Educational Attainment in the World, 1950-2010." Journal of Development Economics, vol 104, pp.184-198. Data downloaded from http://www.barrolee.com/

4. Maddison, Angus. 2004. 'The World Economy: Historical Statistics'. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development: Paris. 13.

5. United Nations Population Division. 2009.

Upper income limit, income share and average of market, total and after-tax income by economic family type and income decile, annual.

Household income statistics by household type (couple family, one-parent family, non-census family households) and household size for Canada, provinces and territories, census divisions and census subdivisions.

These geospatial data resources and the linked mapping tool below reflect currently available data on three categories of potentially qualifying Low-Income communities: Census tracts that meet the CDFI's New Market Tax Credit Program's threshold for Low Income, thereby are able to apply to Category 1. Census tracts that meet the White House's Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool's threshold for disadvantage in the 'Energy' category, thereby are able to apply for Additional Selection Criteria Geography. Counties that meet the USDA's threshold for Persistent Poverty, thereby are able to apply for Additional Selection Criteria Geography. Note that Category 2 - Indian Lands are not shown on this map. Note that Persistent Poverty is not calculated for US Territories. Note that CEJST Energy disadvantage is not calculated for US Territories besides Puerto Rico. The excel tool provides the land area percentage of each 2023 census tract meeting each of the above categories. To examine geographic eligibility for a specific address or latitude and longitude, visit the program's mapping tool. Additional information on this tax credit program can be found on the DOE Landing Page for the 48e program at https://www.energy.gov/diversity/low-income-communities-bonus-credit-program or the IRS Landing Page at https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/low-income-communities-bonus-credit. Maps last updated: September 1st, 2024 Next map update expected: December 7th, 2024 Disclaimer: The spatial data and mapping tool is intended for geolocation purposes. It should not be relied upon by taxpayers to determine eligibility for the Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit Program. Source Acknowledgements: The New Market Tax Credit (NMTC) Tract layer using data from the 2016-2020 ACS is from the CDFI Information Mapping System (CIMS) and is created by the U.S. Department of Treasury Community Development Financial Institutions Fund. To learn more, visit CDFI Information Mapping System (CIMS) | Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (cdfifund.gov). https://www.cdfifund.gov/mapping-system. Tracts are displayed that meet the threshold for the New Market Tax Credit Program. The 'Energy' Category Tract layer from the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) is created by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) within the Executive Office of the President. To learn more, visit https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/. Tracts are displayed that meet the threshold for the 'Energy' Category of burden. I.e., census tracts that are at or above the 90th percentile for (energy burden OR PM2.5 in the air) AND are at or above the 65th percentile for low income. The Persistent Poverty County layer is created by joining the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service's Poverty Area Official Measures dataset, with relevant county TIGER/Line Shapefiles from the US Census Bureau. To learn more, visit https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/poverty-area-measures/. Counties are displayed that meet the thresholds for Persistent Poverty according to 'Official' USDA updates. i.e. areas with a poverty rate of 20.0 percent or more for 4 consecutive time periods, about 10 years apart, spanning approximately 30 years (baseline time period plus 3 evaluation time periods). Until Dec 7th, 2024 both the USDA estimates using 2007-2011 and 2017-2021 ACS 5-year data. On Dec 8th, 2024, only the USDA estimates using 2017-2021 data will be accepted for program eligibility.

This dataset contains replication files for "Is the United States Still a Land of Opportunity? Recent Trends in Intergenerational Mobility" by Raj Chetty, Nathaniel Hendren, Patrick Kline, Emmanuel Saez, and Nicholas Turner. For more information, see https://opportunityinsights.org/paper/recentintergenerationalmobility/. A summary of the related publication follows. We present new evidence on trends in intergenerational mobility in the U.S. using administrative earnings records. We find that percentile rank-based measures of intergenerational mobility have remained extremely stable for the 1971-1993 birth cohorts. For children born between 1971 and 1986, we measure intergenerational mobility based on the correlation between parent and child income percentile ranks. For more recent cohorts, we measure mobility as the correlation between a child’s probability of attending college and her parents’ income rank. We also calculate transition probabilities, such as a child’s chances of reaching the top quintile of the income distribution starting from the bottom quintile. Based on all of these measures, we find that children entering the labor market today have the same chances of moving up in the income distribution (relative to their parents) as children born in the 1970s. However, because inequality has risen, the consequences of the “birth lottery” – the parents to whom a child is born – are larger today than in the past. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the US Treasury Department or the Internal Revenue Service or the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Families of tax filers; Single-earner and dual-earner census families by number of children (final T1 Family File; T1FF).

Abstract

ADI: An index of socioeconomic status for communities. Dataset ingested directly from BigQuery.

Documentation

The Area Deprivation Index (ADI) can show where areas of deprivation and affluence exist within a community. The ADI is calculated with 17 indicators from the American Community Survey (ACS) having been well-studied in the peer-reviewed literature since 2003, and used for 20 years by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA). High levels of deprivation have been linked to health outcomes such as 30-day hospital readmission rates, cardiovascular disease deaths, cervical cancer incidence, cancer deaths, and all-cause mortality. The 17 indicators from the ADI encompass income, education, employment, and housing conditions at the Census Block Group level.

The ADI is available on BigQuery for release years 2018-2020 and is reported as a percentile that is 0-100% with 50% indicating a "middle of the nation" percentile. Data is provided at the county, ZIP, and Census Block Group levels. Neighborhood and racial disparities occur when some neighborhoods have high ADI scores and others have low scores. A low ADI score indicates affluence or prosperity. A high ADI score is indicative of high levels of deprivation. Raw ADI scores and additional statistics and dataviz can be seen in this ADI story with a BroadStreet free account.

Dataset source: https://help.broadstreet.io/article/adi/

As of 2022, the top 10 percent Indian population group in terms of pre-tax income was estimated to hold over ** percent of total income in India, whereas the bottom ** percent group only made up just over ** percent of total income. This reflected an even greater income gap compared to 2000.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the the household distribution across 16 income brackets among four distinct age groups in Utah: Under 25 years, 25-44 years, 45-64 years, and over 65 years. The dataset highlights the variation in household income, offering valuable insights into economic trends and disparities within different age categories, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..

Key observations

• Upon closer examination of the distribution of households among age brackets, it reveals that there are 70,152(6.41%) households where the householder is under 25 years old, 436,366(39.85%) households with a householder aged between 25 and 44 years, 355,280(32.45%) households with a householder aged between 45 and 64 years, and 233,098(21.29%) households where the householder is over 65 years old.
• The age group of 45 to 64 years exhibits the highest median household income, while the largest number of households falls within the 25 to 44 years bracket. This distribution hints at economic disparities within the state of Utah, showcasing varying income levels among different age demographics.

Content

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

Income brackets:

• 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
• $100,000 to $124,999
• $125,000 to $149,999
• $150,000 to $199,999
• $200,000 or more

Variables / Data Columns

• Household Income: This column showcases 16 income brackets ranging from Under $10,000 to $200,000+ ( As mentioned above).
• Under 25 years: The count of households led by a head of household under 25 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 25 to 44 years: The count of households led by a head of household 25 to 44 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 45 to 64 years: The count of households led by a head of household 45 to 64 years old with income within a specified income bracket.
• 65 years and over: The count of households led by a head of household 65 years and over old with income within a specified income bracket.

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 Utah median household income by age. You can refer the same here