Arrivals per 100 people staying and Community resilience to disasters
Where Arrivals per 100 people staying is higher, Community resilience to disasters tends to be lower. The link is weak: -0.31 across 3,080 counties, on a scale from −1 (opposite) to +1 (in step). That figure compares places with the same population density, income and education, so those differences can't explain it. It holds inside states too. Measured separately within each of 40 states, the middle value of the link is +0.13.
Holds after adjusting
Every place, plotted
One dot for each place reporting both measures. Hover over or tap a dot to see its name and values. The thin line is the straight line that best fits the dots. The bold line, shown for counties, is the link after adjusting for density, income and education. A dot far from the lines is a place that does not follow the pattern.
Loading every place…
What each measure is
Arrivals per 100 people staying
Tax filers who moved in, for every hundred who stayed put.
IRS county migration flows · IRS SOI migration, county aggregates
Community resilience to disasters
How ready a county is to get through a disaster and bounce back. Counties are ranked from 0 (least) to 100 (most). The rank mixes 49 facts about a place, such as schooling, health care, jobs, housing, emergency services and local government. It comes from a University of South Carolina index, which FEMA changed a little. Many of the facts come from the Census Bureau's survey, so it partly repeats other measures on this site.
FEMA National Risk Index (Census and University of South Carolina indexes) · FEMA National Risk Index v1.20, NRI_Table_Counties, RESL_SCORE
Highest and lowest
Where each measure is highest and lowest among the places reporting both (2023), with the other measure beside it. This is shown for every size of place where both are published. Metro-area values are added up from their counties. A measure that cannot be added up across counties, such as a middle value (median), has no metro figure. Counts are shown per 1,000 residents, since raw totals would only list the largest places. Cities and towns and ZIP codes are shown where the Census survey or the CDC publishes them; most other sources stop at the county. They are shown for places of 5,000 residents or more, and only where the survey’s margin of error is small enough for the figure to be usable. The CDC publishes its health estimates for cities in a version adjusted for age, so places with older or younger people can be compared fairly, but not for ZIP codes.
Counties
By arrivals per 100 people staying
| Arrivals per 100 people staying | Community resilience to disasters | |
|---|---|---|
| Highest | ||
| Chattahoochee County, GA | 46.3 | 1.34 |
| Williamsburg city, VA | 24.5 | 85.7 |
| Geary County, KS | 24 | 48.5 |
| Liberty County, GA | 21.1 | 32.7 |
| Long County, GA | 21 | 4.17 |
| Lowest | ||
| Sheridan County, MT | 1.33 | 12 |
| North Slope Borough, AK | 1.64 | 3.18 |
| Webb County, TX | 1.79 | 7.32 |
| McPherson County, SD | 1.85 | 55.2 |
| Fallon County, MT | 1.86 | 22.5 |
By community resilience to disasters
| Arrivals per 100 people staying | Community resilience to disasters | |
|---|---|---|
| Highest | ||
| Ozaukee County, WI | 5.46 | 100 |
| St. Charles Parish, LA | 5.56 | 100 |
| Dare County, NC | 6.79 | 99.9 |
| Orleans Parish, LA | 7.55 | 99.9 |
| Leelanau County, MI | 6.64 | 99.8 |
| Lowest | ||
| Hudspeth County, TX | 4.38 | 0.0318 |
| Esmeralda County, NV | 13.6 | 0.0636 |
| Presidio County, TX | 4.23 | 0.0954 |
| Oglala Lakota County, SD | 3.67 | 0.127 |
| La Paz County, AZ | 10.6 | 0.191 |
States — Community resilience to disasters is not published for states
By arrivals per 100 people staying
| Arrivals per 100 people staying | Community resilience to disasters | |
|---|---|---|
| Highest | ||
| District of Columbia | 9.71 | — |
| Alaska | 4.87 | — |
| Wyoming | 4.8 | — |
| Nevada | 4.69 | — |
| Delaware | 4.66 | — |
| Lowest | ||
| California | 1.35 | — |
| Michigan | 1.57 | — |
| Ohio | 1.72 | — |
| New York | 1.85 | — |
| Illinois | 1.86 | — |
Metro areas — Community resilience to disasters is not published for metro areas
By arrivals per 100 people staying
| Arrivals per 100 people staying | Community resilience to disasters | |
|---|---|---|
| Highest | ||
| Hinesville, GA | 19 | — |
| Fort Leonard Wood, MO | 17.2 | — |
| Jacksonville, NC | 15.5 | — |
| Ozark, AL | 14.8 | — |
| Anderson Creek, NC | 14.3 | — |
| Lowest | ||
| New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ | 1.71 | — |
| Laredo, TX | 1.79 | — |
| Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN | 1.91 | — |
| St. Marys, PA | 2.08 | — |
| Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI | 2.11 | — |
Counties furthest from the pattern
Compared with the straight line that best fits all 3,096 counties: the five with far more community resilience to disasters than their arrivals per 100 people staying would suggest, and the five with far less.
| Arrivals per 100 people staying | Community resilience to disasters | |
|---|---|---|
| Above the line | ||
| Williamsburg city, VA | 24.5 | 85.7 |
| Falls Church city, VA | 15.7 | 98.3 |
| Fredericksburg city, VA | 20.3 | 84.3 |
| York County, VA | 13.1 | 94.4 |
| Lincoln County, SD | 10.5 | 97.6 |
| Below the line | ||
| Starr County, TX | 2.32 | 0.35 |
| Zapata County, TX | 2.41 | 0.509 |
| Hidalgo County, TX | 2.3 | 0.859 |
| Jackson County, SD | 2.75 | 0.413 |
| Hamilton County, KS | 2.36 | 1.24 |
Two series, one county
Both measures over time for a county you pick. The two charts are stacked, so they share only the years along the bottom. You can pick from the thirty largest counties reporting both. This panel covers 2010–2024, and a measure published only once shows as a single dot.
Loading…
Every version of the link
Each row measures the same link, from −1 to +1, in a different way. If the rows mostly agree, the link does not depend on one choice of method.
| Before adjusting for anything | -0.137 | 3,080 counties reporting both |
| After adjusting for density, income and education | -0.311 | the part of the link that is not just how urban, rich and educated a place is |
| Also adjusting for population size | -0.341 | size taken out as well as density |
| Also comparing only within each state | -0.054 | each county is compared only with others in its own state, so this is no longer a comparison between states |
| Giving bigger counties more weight | -0.101 | the adjusted link for the average resident rather than the average county. With this weighting, the data counts for about 287 equally weighted counties |
| Middle value inside single states | +0.127 | the link worked out inside each of 40 states with at least 20 counties reporting |
| Using ranks, after adjusting | -0.334 | uses each county’s rank, not its value, so a few extreme counties cannot create the link |
How much to believe it
Could it be chance?
The p-value is the chance of seeing a link this strong if there were really none. A value of 0.05 or less means the link is unlikely to be chance. Very small values are written in short form: 3.1e-16 means 0.00000000000000031, and the bigger the number after “e-”, the smaller the value. Treating every county as a separate case gives p = 5.0e-70. But counties in the same state tend to resemble each other, so the better figure allows for that: p = 5.0e-7. The site tested 29,403 pairs, and testing so many turns up some flukes. The q-value allows for that too. For this pair it is 4.1e-69.
Do nearby places look alike?
Moran’s I measures how much nearby places look alike: 0 means no map pattern, and higher means neighbours are more similar. For the part of each county that the adjustment leaves unexplained, it is +0.53 (p = 0.001). That unexplained part still clusters on the map. So some regional factor shared by both measures is not accounted for.
Did they change together?
Not measurable: at least one of these is published for too few of the years a change needs (2014–2019 or 2019–2023), or for too few counties in both.
Related pairs
- Natural amenities scale and Community resilience to disasters — -0.48
- Community resilience to disasters and Social connection score — +0.47
- Arrivals per 100 people staying and Mutual-friend share — -0.44
- Community resilience to disasters and Economic connectedness — +0.44
- House price index (2000 = 100) and Community resilience to disasters — -0.42
- New homes permitted per 1,000 residents and Arrivals per 100 people staying — +0.39
- Community resilience to disasters and Mainline Protestant adherents — +0.38
- Returns claiming the earned income credit and Community resilience to disasters — -0.38
Association only. Nothing here shows that either measure changes the other. This describes counties, not the people in them. Two measures going together across places does not mean the same people have both. How the US county data works · Explore Arrivals per 100 people staying and Community resilience to disasters