Demographics details for Andrew, IA vs Graceville, FL
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Andrew, IA vs Graceville, FL.
| Data | Andrew | Graceville |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 378 | 2,175 |
| Median Age | 39.8 years | 31.7 years |
| Median Income | $61,613 | $36,625 |
| Married Families | 51.0% | 41.0% |
| Poverty Level | 9% | 18% |
| Unemployment Rate | 2.5 | 3.2 |
Population Comparison: Andrew vs Graceville
- The population in Graceville is higher at 2,175, compared to 378 in Andrew.
- Residents in Andrew have a higher median age of 39.8 years compared to 31.7 years in Graceville.
- Andrew has a higher median income of $61,613 compared to $36,625 in Graceville.
- A higher percentage of married families is found in Andrew at 51.0% compared to 41.0% in Graceville.
- The poverty level is higher in Graceville at 18%, compared to 9% in Andrew.
- Graceville has a higher unemployment rate at 3.2% compared to 2.5% in Andrew.
Demographics
Demographics Andrew vs Graceville provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Andrew | Graceville |
|---|---|---|
| Black | Data is updating | 32 |
| White | 98 | 59 |
| Asian | Data is updating | 1 |
| Hispanic | 1 | 6 |
| Two or More Races | 1 | 2 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Andrew vs Graceville
- In Graceville, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 32% compared to 0% in Andrew.
- Andrew has a higher percentage of White residents at 98% compared to 59% in Graceville.
- In Graceville, the Asian population stands at 1%, greater than 0% in Andrew.
- Graceville has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 6%, compared to 1% in Andrew.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Graceville at 2%, compared to 1% in Andrew.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Andrew and Graceville at 0%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Andrew | Graceville |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 15.2% | 18.6% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 9.4% | 13.2% |
| Depression | 18.3% | 22.2% |
| Smoking | 17.4% | 24.4% |
| Binge Drinking | 23.4% | 15.8% |
| Obesity | 35.2% | 33.6% |
| Disability Percentage | 8.0% | 18.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Andrew vs Graceville
- In Graceville, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 18.6% compared to 15.2% in Andrew.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Graceville at 22.2% versus 18.3% in Andrew.
- Graceville has a higher smoking rate at 24.4% compared to 17.4% in Andrew.
- Binge drinking is more common in Andrew at 23.4% compared to 15.8% in Graceville.
- Obesity rates are higher in Andrew at 35.2% compared to 33.6% in Graceville.
- There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Graceville at 18.0% compared to 8.0% in Andrew.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Andrew | Graceville |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.0% (Data is updating) | 2.7% (58) |
| High School Diploma | 25.1% (95) | 25.3% (550) |
| Less than High School | 11.6% (44) | 22.5% (490) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 8.5% (32) | 15.2% (331) |
Education Levels Comparison: Andrew vs Graceville
- In Graceville, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 2.7% compared to 0.0% in Andrew.
- In Graceville, the rate of residents with high school diplomas is higher at 25.3% compared to 25.1% in Andrew.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Graceville at 22.5%, compared to 11.6% in Andrew.
- In Graceville, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 15.2% compared to 8.5% in Andrew.
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.