Demographics details for Loves park, IL vs Coalinga, CA
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Loves park, IL vs Coalinga, CA.
| Data | Loves park | Coalinga |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 23,365 | 17,024 |
| Median Age | 36.6 years | 35.0 years |
| Median Income | $56,370 | $68,976 |
| Married Families | 35.0% | 31.0% |
| Poverty Level | 9% | 15% |
| Unemployment Rate | 3.6 | 6.5 |
Population Comparison: Loves park vs Coalinga
- In Loves park, the population is higher at 23,365, compared to 17,024 in Coalinga.
- Residents in Loves park have a higher median age of 36.6 years compared to 35.0 years in Coalinga.
- Coalinga has a higher median income of $68,976, compared to $56,370 in Loves park.
- A higher percentage of married families is found in Loves park at 35.0% compared to 31.0% in Coalinga.
- The poverty level is higher in Coalinga at 15%, compared to 9% in Loves park.
- Coalinga has a higher unemployment rate at 6.5% compared to 3.6% in Loves park.
Demographics
Demographics Loves park vs Coalinga provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Loves park | Coalinga |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 7 | 4 |
| White | 71 | 9 |
| Asian | 3 | 2 |
| Hispanic | 10 | 65 |
| Two or More Races | 9 | 18 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | 2 |
Demographics Comparison: Loves park vs Coalinga
- A higher percentage of Black residents are in Loves park at 7% compared to 4% in Coalinga.
- Loves park has a higher percentage of White residents at 71% compared to 9% in Coalinga.
- The Asian population is larger in Loves park at 3% compared to 2% in Coalinga.
- Coalinga has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 65%, compared to 10% in Loves park.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Coalinga at 18%, compared to 9% in Loves park.
- In Coalinga, the percentage of American Indian residents is higher at 2%, compared to 0% in Loves park.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Loves park | Coalinga |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 16.3% | 16.9% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 11.3% | 13.9% |
| Depression | 21.3% | 16.4% |
| Smoking | 17.0% | 17.2% |
| Binge Drinking | 17.0% | 15.9% |
| Obesity | 39.4% | 39.1% |
| Disability Percentage | 14.0% | 13.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Loves park vs Coalinga
- In Coalinga, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 16.9% compared to 16.3% in Loves park.
- Depression is more prevalent in Loves park at 21.3% compared to 16.4% in Coalinga.
- Coalinga has a higher smoking rate at 17.2% compared to 17.0% in Loves park.
- Binge drinking is more common in Loves park at 17.0% compared to 15.9% in Coalinga.
- Obesity rates are higher in Loves park at 39.4% compared to 39.1% in Coalinga.
- Disability percentages are higher in Loves park at 14.0% compared to 13.0% in Coalinga.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Loves park | Coalinga |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.4% (97) | 3.2% (537) |
| High School Diploma | 17.1% (3,994) | 13.8% (2,349) |
| Less than High School | 9.7% (2,262) | 39.2% (6,672) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 17.4% (4,064) | 8.1% (1,380) |
Education Levels Comparison: Loves park vs Coalinga
- In Coalinga, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 3.2% compared to 0.4% in Loves park.
- A higher percentage of residents in Loves park hold a high school diploma at 17.1% compared to 13.8% in Coalinga.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Coalinga at 39.2%, compared to 9.7% in Loves park.
- A higher percentage of residents in Loves park hold a bachelor's degree or higher at 17.4% compared to 8.1% in Coalinga.
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.