DOCSLIB.ORG

Count and Rate of Confirmed COVID-19 Cases and Tests Performed in MA by County, January 1, 2020 – March 30, 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Count and Rate of Confirmed COVID-19 Cases and Tests Performed in MA by County, January 1, 2020 – March 30, 2021 Massachusetts Department of Public Health COVID-19 Dashboard – Wednesday, March 31, 2021 Count and Rate of Confirmed COVID-19 Cases and Tests Performed in MA by County, January 1, 2020 – March 30, 2021 Average Daily Relative Percent Case Count Total Tests Total Change in Total Case Incidence Rate Change in Total Positivity County (Last 14 (Last 14 Positive Percent Count per 100,000 Case Tests (Last 14 2 Days) days) Tests (Last Positivity (Last 14 days) Counts1 14 days) days) Barnstable County 12150 1218 40.2 Higher 338690 21189 1325 6.25% Higher Berkshire County 5507 442 25.0 Higher 321832 23391 459 1.96% Higher Bristol County 59917 2344 29.3 Higher 1115279 61371 2547 4.15% Higher Dukes and Nantucket Counties 2278 137 34.0 Higher 69878 2918 144 4.93% Higher Essex County 89306 2894 25.9 Higher 1881672 101687 3381 3.32% Higher Franklin County 2215 122 12.2 Higher 172456 11539 131 1.14% Higher Hampden County 45842 2029 30.8 Higher 950250 56920 2353 4.13% Higher Hampshire County 8327 429 18.7 Higher 699434 68144 467 0.69% No Change Middlesex County 122220 5432 23.9 Higher 4845681 315866 6103 1.93% Higher Norfolk County 49962 2240 22.4 Higher 1675203 99930 2482 2.48% Higher Plymouth County 44165 2070 28.0 Higher 931636 52293 2267 4.34% Higher Suffolk County 84646 3253 28.7 Higher 3600756 235480 3661 1.55% Higher Worcester County 70405 2364 20.1 Higher 1937362 123226 2602 2.11% Higher Unknown3 1237 10 * * 280879 10404 10 * * State 598177 24984 25.6 Higher 18821008 1184358 27932 2.36% Higher Data are current as of 11:59pm on 03/30/2021; 1Number of new cases occurring over the current two-week period (3/14/2021 – 3/27/2021) compared to the previous two-week period (3/7/2021 – 3/20/2021). Higher=number of new cases in the current two-week period higher than the number of new cases during the last two-week period. Lower=number of new cases in the current two- week period lower than number of new cases during the last two-week period. No change=number of new cases in current two-week period is equal to the number of new cases during the last two-week period. 2Change in percent positivity compared to the previous week’s (3/24/2021) report. No Change= <0.10% difference in the percent positivity. 3Address information for these cases is currently being obtained. DPH calculates rates per 100,000 population using denominators estimated by the University of Massachusetts Donahue Institute using a modified Hamilton-Perry model (Strate S, et al. Small Area Population Estimates for 2011 through 2020, report, Oct 2016.) Please note: Data for these tables are based on information available in the DPH surveillance database at a single point in time. Case counts for specific cities and towns change throughout the day as data cleaning occurs (removal of duplicate reports within the system) and new demographic information (assigning cases to their city or town of residence) is obtained. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • (I.) Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia and The
    (I.) MEČISLAV BORÁK (Czech Republic) The main features of occupation policy in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia and the rest of Protectorate of the Czech Lands Bohemia and When Nazi German troops occupied the interior of the Czech Lands in March 1939, the invasion marked the beginning of over six years of occupation which would last until the final days of the Second World War in Europe. On Moravia and the basis of a decree issued by Hitler, the occupying authorities established an entity named the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia; however, despite its proclaimed autonomy, the Protectorate was in fact entirely controlled by the post-war the German Reich, and the Reich’s actions proved decisive for the fate of the Czech nation. When researching this period, however, we should not neglect the fact that there were other parts of the Czech Lands which lay outside development of the the Protectorate throughout the war, as the Nazis had seized them from Czechoslovakia in the autumn of 1938, before the invasion of what remained of the country. This seizure was a consequence of the Munich Agreement, State – historical which enabled Nazi Germany to annex the border areas in the historical provinces of Bohemia, Moravia and Silesia; the Agreement was forced upon the Czechoslovak Republic, and ultimately led to the state’s disintegration overview and demise. In September 1939 the Polish-occupied part of Těšín (Teschen/ Cieszyn) Silesia were taken by Germany; from this point on, the entire territory of the Czech Lands (both the border regions and the interior) came under the direct control of the Third Reich.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit Era
    Island Studies Journal, 15(1), 2020, 151-168 The sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit era Maria Mut Bosque School of Law, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Spain MINECO DER 2017-86138, Ministry of Economic Affairs & Digital Transformation, Spain Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London, UK [email protected] (corresponding author) Abstract: This paper focuses on an analysis of the sovereignty of two territorial entities that have unique relations with the United Kingdom: the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories (BOTs). Each of these entities includes very different territories, with different legal statuses and varying forms of self-administration and constitutional linkages with the UK. However, they also share similarities and challenges that enable an analysis of these territories as a complete set. The incomplete sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and BOTs has entailed that all these territories (except Gibraltar) have not been allowed to participate in the 2016 Brexit referendum or in the withdrawal negotiations with the EU. Moreover, it is reasonable to assume that Brexit is not an exceptional situation. In the future there will be more and more relevant international issues for these territories which will remain outside of their direct control, but will have a direct impact on them. Thus, if no adjustments are made to their statuses, these territories will have to keep trusting that the UK will be able to represent their interests at the same level as its own interests. Keywords: Brexit, British Overseas Territories (BOTs), constitutional status, Crown Dependencies, sovereignty https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.114 • Received June 2019, accepted March 2020 © 2020—Institute of Island Studies, University of Prince Edward Island, Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • A Global Comparison of Non-Sovereign Island Territories: the Search for ‘True Equality’
    Island Studies Journal, 15(1), 2020, 43-66 A global comparison of non-sovereign island territories: the search for ‘true equality’ Malcom Ferdinand CNRS, Paris, France [email protected] Gert Oostindie KITLV, the Netherlands Leiden University, the Netherlands [email protected] (corresponding author) Wouter Veenendaal KITLV, the Netherlands Leiden University, the Netherlands [email protected] Abstract: For a great majority of former colonies, the outcome of decolonization was independence. Yet scattered across the globe, remnants of former colonial empires are still non-sovereign as part of larger metropolitan states. There is little drive for independence in these territories, virtually all of which are small island nations, also known as sub-national island jurisdictions (SNIJs). Why do so many former colonial territories choose to remain non-sovereign? In this paper we attempt to answer this question by conducting a global comparative study of non-sovereign jurisdictions. We start off by analyzing their present economic, social and political conditions, after which we assess local levels of (dis)content with the contemporary political status, and their articulation in postcolonial politics. We find that levels of discontent and frustration covary with the particular demographic, socio- economic and historical-cultural conditions of individual territories. While significant independence movements can be observed in only two or three jurisdictions, in virtually all cases there is profound dissatisfaction and frustration with the contemporary non-sovereign arrangement and its outcomes. Instead of achieving independence, the territories’ real struggle nowadays is for obtaining ‘true equality’ with the metropolis, as well as recognition of their distinct cultural identities.
    [Show full text]
  • State of the County March 2, 2021
    STATE OF THE COUNTY MARCH 2, 2021 Delivered by Chairman of the Board, Vito Chiesa 1 Good Morning my fellow members of the Board of Supervisors, CEO Hayes, County Counsel Boze, those who are in the chambers today and those who might be watching on television or over the internet. It is a privilege to present the State of the County Address for 2021. And what a humbling experience this is, during one of the most historic times in the history of our nation and the world. I want to offer thanks to our immediate past chair, former Supervisor Kristin Olsen. Her commitment left us a tremendous example of how to lead. I am also especially thankful for my time having served alongside Supervisor Jim DeMartini. Supervisor DeMartini, served the County selflessly year after year. He was a tireless, committed, and reliable leader with conviction. Supervisor Withrow…Terry, we have sat here together for years and every week I look forward to hearing your passion come through. Your drive to serve people in need - especially those with mental health or homelessness struggles - inspires me. And to the three new Supervisors serving the County, Supervisors Mani Grewal, Channce Condit, and Buck Condit, each of you comes to us with a history of public service and a passion for the community. Thank you for your commitment to the people we serve. I feel honored to serve alongside each of you. This past year saw a tremendous loss with the passing of Supervisor Tom Berryhill. Even if you did not know Tom personally, he was a friend to this community, defending and fighting for our region his entire career.
    [Show full text]
  • Country Report: France
    Country Report: France 2020 Update 2020 Update Acknowledgements & Methodology The 2020 update of this report was written by Laurent Delbos and Claire Tripier at Forum réfugiés – Cosi and edited by ECRE. Forum réfugiés-Cosi wishes to thank all those individuals and organisations who shared their expertise to contribute or check the information gathered during the research. Particular thanks are owed to many Forum réfugiés-Cosi colleagues who have shared their practical experience on the right of asylum in France – which have been key to feed concrete reality-checks and observations into this report; to the two lawyers who have taken the time to share their views on the French system; to the staff of France terre d’asile, the Anafé and the UNHCR Paris office for their expert and constructive feedback provided for the initial report and finally to ECRE for its support throughout the drafting process. Forum réfugiés- Cosi would also like to thank the European Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) for co-financing its awareness-raising missions which allowed us to provide additional time to research and draft this report. The findings presented in this report stem from background desk research, interviews with field practitioners and lawyers, as well as feedback from French NGOs and the Paris-based UNHCR office and finally statistics shared by the French authorities. Caveat: In France, asylum policies – including reception procedures – are largely under prefectural execution. This review of practice is mostly based on observations in the departments of Ile de France, Rhône, Puy-de-Dôme, Haute- Garonne and Alpes-Maritimes. However, the conclusions presented in this report on the concrete implementation of asylum policies have been cross-checked and triangulated with observations of these practices in other regions and are supported by findings presented in other reports – be they official or drafted by civil society organisations.
    [Show full text]
  • Consumer Price Index, Northeast Region – March 2021
    For Release: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 21-680-PHI MID-ATLANTIC INFORMATION OFFICE: Philadelphia, Pa. Technical information: (215) 597-3282 [email protected] www.bls.gov/regions/mid-atlantic Media contact: (215) 861-5600 [email protected] Consumer Price Index, Northeast Region – March 2021 Regional prices up 0.6 percent over the month; up 2.1 percent over the year The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the Northeast increased 0.6 percent in March, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Regional Commissioner Alexandra Hall Bovee noted that the recent increase reflected advances in the all items less food and energy index (0.5 percent) and the energy index (2.3 percent) since February. The food index also increased over the month, up 0.6 percent. (Data in this report are not seasonally adjusted. Accordingly, month-to-month changes may reflect the impact of seasonal influences.) Over the last 12 months, the Northeast all items CPI-U increased 2.1 percent (See chart 1 and table A.) This reflected an advance in the all items less food and energy index, up 1.3 percent. The energy index and the food index also rose since March 2020, up 9.9 and 3.3 percent, respectively. (See table 1.) Food The food index increased 0.6 percent since February. Prices were higher for both food away from home and food at home, up 1.0 and 0.3 percent, respectively. From March 2020 to March 2021, the food index increased 3.3 percent. Prices for food away from home increased over the year, up 4.5 percent; those for food at home also rose, up 2.5 percent.
    [Show full text]
  • The UK Caribbean Overseas Territories, New Labour, and the Strengthening of Metropolitan Control Caribbean Studies, Vol
    Caribbean Studies ISSN: 0008-6533 [email protected] Instituto de Estudios del Caribe Puerto Rico Clegg, Peter The UK caribbean overseas territories, new labour, and the strengthening of metropolitan control Caribbean Studies, vol. 34, núm. 1, enero-junio, 2006, pp. 131-161 Instituto de Estudios del Caribe San Juan, Puerto Rico Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=39211247005 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative THE UK CARIBBEAN OVERSEAS TERRITORIES... 131 THE UK CARIBBEAN OVERSEAS TERRITORIES, NEW LABOUR, AND THE STRENGTHENING OF METROPOLITAN CONTROL Peter Clegg ABSTRACT The article analyses the complex and ever-evolving relationship between Britain and its Overseas Territories in the Caribbean. Links between Britain and its Territories have been shaped and determined by particular historical, constitutional, political and economic trends. For many years the relationship between the Territories and the UK was rather ad hoc—a situation that can be traced back to the compromises, fudges and deals char- acteristic of ‘pragmatic’ British colonial administration. More recently, however, there have been attempts by the Labour government in Britain to overcome the informal nature of the relationship and to develop a new partnership based on mutual obligations and responsibilities. The article describes the appli- cations of this more pro-active and coherent level of oversight and highlights how the principle of more forceful metropolitan control has taken hold. The article asserts that the Territories are now much more heavily integrated into the international system, having adopted either willingly or unwillingly a number of changes to their political, economic and social structures.
    [Show full text]
  • National Ski Council Federation Newsbeat March 2021
    National Ski Council Federation Newsbeat March 2021 Resorts Roll Out 2021—22 Pass Programs. Many are offering financing options and carrying over Covid- related assurances. Prices seem to be holding steady and even rising, although a number of resorts are adding value, like spring access and reciprocal tickets, and offering discounts to renewing passholders. More. SAM IKON Pass Program for 2021-22 Shows Few Changes. Now encompassing 44 resorts, the primary options are the Ikon Pass, the more limited Ikon Base Pass, and four-day Ikon Session Pass. The first two come with many of the same benefits as for 2020-21, too. More. SAM The Five Types of Northeast Ski Season Passes. They’re here a bit later than in previous years and are, (mostly) a bit more expensive than they were last season, but they also include, in general, a few more perks. More. The Storm Skiing Journal Indy Pass Adds Waterville Valley (NH) and Saddleback (ME). Both resorts will provide two days of skiing and riding to all Indy Pass holders during the remainder of the 20-21 and the 21-22 seasons. More. SAM Four Ways Travel Will Be Different in 2021, According to Airbnb. More car trips. Fewer far-flung destinations. A little less oversharing. Here’s how travel could look different on the other side of the pandemic. More. Fast Company via Intopia | Destimetrics Airline Industry Set for COVID Comeback, But It Will Be a Slow Climb. The Kiplinger Letter forecasts leisure travel will soar past business travel, but air travel demand won't reach pre-pandemic levels until as late as 2024.
    [Show full text]
  • FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 9, 2021 Dallas County Reports 265 New Positive 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Cases and 31 Deaths
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 9, 2021 Dallas County Reports 265 New Positive 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Cases and 31 Deaths, Including 14 Probable Cases DALLAS -- As of 2:00 pm March 9, 2021 Dallas County Health and Human Services is reporting 265 additional positive cases of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) in Dallas County, 251 confirmed cases and 14 probable cases. There is a cumulative total of 248,225 confirmed cases (PCR test). There is a cumulative total of 36,710 probable cases (antigen test). A total of 3,180 Dallas County residents have lost their lives due to COVID-19 illness. Dallas County Health and Human Services (DCHHS) is providing initial vaccinations to those most at risk of exposure to COVID-19 and over 132,000 total doses of COVID-19 vaccine have been administered at the Fair Park mega-vaccine clinic, which started operations on Monday, January 11. At Fair Park, first doses through the Community Vaccination Center and second doses through DCHHS will continue this week. The additional deaths being reported today include the following: A man in his 50’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital and had underlying high risk health conditions. A man in his 50’s who was a resident of the City of Garland. He expired in hospice and had underlying high risk health conditions. A man in his 50’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been hospitalized and had underlying high risk health conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Helping COFA Migrants Enroll in Coverage
    Fact Sheet for Assisters: Helping COFA Migrants Enroll in Coverage Updated March 2016 As assisters, you may be working with consumers who are Compact of Free Association (COFA) migrants. COFA migrants live throughout the country, and there are ten states that currently have COFA migrant populations exceeding 1,000: Hawaii, California, Washington, Oregon, Utah, Oklahoma, Florida, Arkansas, Missouri, and Arizona. Below are some answers to commonly asked questions to help you understand factors that affect COFA migrants’ eligibility for Marketplace coverage and financial assistance and help them afford Marketplace coverage and pay for covered services. Q1: Who are COFA migrants? A1: COFA, or the Compacts of Free Association, are agreements between the U.S. Government and three independent countries: the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RFI), the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), and the Republic of Palau. Certain citizens of these three independent nations are legally able to work, study, and reside in the 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories. Individuals who choose to do so are often referred to as COFA migrants and most are residing in the United States as lawfully present non- citizens. Citizens of the RFI, the FSM, and Palau may also have U.S. lawful permanent resident status (i.e. Green Card holder) or some other status under U.S. immigration law. For a list of immigration statuses that qualify for Marketplace coverage, visit https://www.healthcare.gov/immigrants/immigration-status/. Q2: Are COFA migrants eligible to enroll in qualified health plans through the Marketplace? A2: Yes, as lawfully present U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Peace of Augsburg in Three Imperial Cities by Istvan
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Waterloo's Institutional Repository Biconfessionalism and Tolerance: The Peace of Augsburg in Three Imperial Cities by Istvan Szepesi A thesis presented to the University Of Waterloo in fulfilment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Arts in History Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2016 © Istvan Szepesi 2016 I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the public. ii Abstract In contrast to the atmosphere of mistrust and division between confessions that was common to most polities during the Reformation era, the Peace of Augsburg, signed in 1555, declared the free imperial cities of the Holy Roman Empire a place where both Catholics and Lutherans could live together in peace. While historians readily acknowledge the exceptional nature of this clause of the Peace, they tend to downplay its historical significance through an undue focus on its long-term failures. In order to challenge this interpretation, this paper examines the successes and failures of the free imperial cities’ implementation of the Peace through a comparative analysis of religious coexistence in Augsburg, Cologne, and Nuremberg during the Peace’s 63- year duration. This investigation reveals that while religious coexistence did eventually fail first in Nuremberg and then in Cologne, the Peace made major strides in the short term which offer important insights into the nature of tolerance and confessional conflict in urban Germany during the late Reformation era.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Federation Opinion on the Draft
    Strasbourg, 18 June 2020 CDL-AD(2020)009 Opinion No. 981/2020 Or. Engl. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) RUSSIAN FEDERATION OPINION ON THE DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION (AS SIGNED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION ON 14 MARCH 2020) RELATED TO THE EXECUTION IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION OF DECISIONS BY THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS Adopted by the Venice Commission on 18 June 2020 by a written procedure replacing the 123rd plenary session On the basis of comments by: Mr Nicos ALIVIZATOS (Member, Greece) Ms Claire BAZY-MALAURIE (Member, France) Mr Iain CAMERON (Member, Sweden) Ms Monika HERMANNS (Substitute Member, Germany) Mr Martin KUIJER (Substitute Member, the Netherlands) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL-AD(2020)009 - 2 - TABLE OF CONTENT I. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 3 II. Scope of the Opinion ..................................................................................................... 3 III. Background information................................................................................................. 5 A. Adoption of the proposed draft amendments ............................................................. 5 B. National and international legal framework ................................................................ 6 C. Rulings of the Constitutional Court on the enforceability of the ECtHR’s judgments
    [Show full text]