Demographics details for Kingsland, GA vs Provo, UT
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Kingsland, GA vs Provo, UT.
| Data | Kingsland | Provo |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 19,896 | 113,523 |
| Median Age | 33.1 years | 23.6 years |
| Median Income | $73,839 | $57,943 |
| Married Families | 36.0% | 36.0% |
| Poverty Level | 9% | 11% |
| Unemployment Rate | 3.5 | 4.0 |
Population Comparison: Kingsland vs Provo
- The population in Provo is higher at 113,523, compared to 19,896 in Kingsland.
- Residents in Kingsland have a higher median age of 33.1 years compared to 23.6 years in Provo.
- Kingsland has a higher median income of $73,839 compared to $57,943 in Provo.
- The percentage of married families is the same in both Kingsland and Provo at 36.0%.
- The poverty level is higher in Provo at 11%, compared to 9% in Kingsland.
- Provo has a higher unemployment rate at 4.0% compared to 3.5% in Kingsland.
Demographics
Demographics Kingsland vs Provo provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Kingsland | Provo |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 21 | 1 |
| White | 60 | 69 |
| Asian | 2 | 2 |
| Hispanic | 8 | 18 |
| Two or More Races | 9 | 9 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | 1 |
Demographics Comparison: Kingsland vs Provo
- A higher percentage of Black residents are in Kingsland at 21% compared to 1% in Provo.
- The percentage of White residents is higher in Provo at 69% compared to 60% in Kingsland.
- Both Kingsland and Provo have the same percentage of Asian residents at 2%.
- Provo has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 18%, compared to 8% in Kingsland.
- Both Kingsland and Provo have the same percentage of residents identifying as two or more races at 9%.
- In Provo, the percentage of American Indian residents is higher at 1%, compared to 0% in Kingsland.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Kingsland | Provo |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 16.8% | 16.3% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 11.9% | 12.0% |
| Depression | 21.8% | 24.5% |
| Smoking | 17.3% | 8.4% |
| Binge Drinking | 16.1% | 7.3% |
| Obesity | 36.1% | 33.5% |
| Disability Percentage | 9.0% | 10.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Kingsland vs Provo
- More residents in Kingsland report poor mental health at 16.8% compared to 16.3% in Provo.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Provo at 24.5% versus 21.8% in Kingsland.
- Smoking is more prevalent in Kingsland at 17.3% compared to 8.4% in Provo.
- Binge drinking is more common in Kingsland at 16.1% compared to 7.3% in Provo.
- Obesity rates are higher in Kingsland at 36.1% compared to 33.5% in Provo.
- There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Provo at 10.0% compared to 9.0% in Kingsland.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Kingsland | Provo |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.3% (51) | 0.6% (663) |
| High School Diploma | 15.6% (3,105) | 4.6% (5,209) |
| Less than High School | 5.9% (1,175) | 5.7% (6,435) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 13.1% (2,616) | 18.3% (20,752) |
Education Levels Comparison: Kingsland vs Provo
- In Provo, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 0.6% compared to 0.3% in Kingsland.
- A higher percentage of residents in Kingsland hold a high school diploma at 15.6% compared to 4.6% in Provo.
- More residents in Kingsland have less than a high school education at 5.9% compared to 5.7% in Provo.
- In Provo, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 18.3% compared to 13.1% in Kingsland.
Crime and Safety
Understanding crime rates and safety measures is crucial for assessing the livability of a city or town. Crime levels can vary significantly from one neighborhood to another, influenced by various factors such as population density and local amenities. For instance, areas with high foot traffic, like train stations, might experience different crime dynamics compared to quieter residential neighborhoods. Evaluating these patterns helps in making informed decisions about safety and community well-being.