Demographics details for Clayton, NC vs Grinnell, KS
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Clayton, NC vs Grinnell, KS.
| Data | Clayton | Grinnell |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 29,445 | 254 |
| Median Age | 32.6 years | 37.9 years |
| Median Income | $71,698 | $56,042 |
| Married Families | 35.0% | 58.0% |
| Poverty Level | 5% | 12% |
| Unemployment Rate | 3.7 | 3.2 |
Population Comparison: Clayton vs Grinnell
- In Clayton, the population is higher at 29,445, compared to 254 in Grinnell.
- The median age in Grinnell is higher at 37.9 years, compared to 32.6 years in Clayton.
- Clayton has a higher median income of $71,698 compared to $56,042 in Grinnell.
- In Grinnell, the percentage of married families is higher at 58.0%, compared to 35.0% in Clayton.
- The poverty level is higher in Grinnell at 12%, compared to 5% in Clayton.
- The unemployment rate in Clayton is higher at 3.7%, compared to 3.2% in Grinnell.
Demographics
Demographics Clayton vs Grinnell provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Clayton | Grinnell |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 22 | Data is updating |
| White | 59 | 100 |
| Asian | 1 | Data is updating |
| Hispanic | 13 | Data is updating |
| Two or More Races | 5 | Data is updating |
| American Indian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Clayton vs Grinnell
- A higher percentage of Black residents are in Clayton at 22% compared to 0% in Grinnell.
- The percentage of White residents is higher in Grinnell at 100% compared to 59% in Clayton.
- The Asian population is larger in Clayton at 1% compared to 0% in Grinnell.
- The Hispanic community is larger in Clayton at 13% compared to 0% in Grinnell.
- More residents identify as two or more races in Clayton at 5% compared to 0% in Grinnell.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Clayton and Grinnell at 0%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Clayton | Grinnell |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 15.6% | 15.1% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 10.4% | 9.6% |
| Depression | 23.1% | 20.1% |
| Smoking | 15.2% | 17.6% |
| Binge Drinking | 17.6% | 20.4% |
| Obesity | 39.9% | 38.3% |
| Disability Percentage | 10.0% | 15.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Clayton vs Grinnell
- More residents in Clayton report poor mental health at 15.6% compared to 15.1% in Grinnell.
- Depression is more prevalent in Clayton at 23.1% compared to 20.1% in Grinnell.
- Grinnell has a higher smoking rate at 17.6% compared to 15.2% in Clayton.
- More residents engage in binge drinking in Grinnell at 20.4% compared to 17.6% in Clayton.
- Obesity rates are higher in Clayton at 39.9% compared to 38.3% in Grinnell.
- There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Grinnell at 15.0% compared to 10.0% in Clayton.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Clayton | Grinnell |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.7% (210) | 0.0% (Data is updating) |
| High School Diploma | 12.6% (3,700) | 18.9% (48) |
| Less than High School | 5.4% (1,598) | 16.5% (42) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 18.6% (5,471) | 16.9% (43) |
Education Levels Comparison: Clayton vs Grinnell
- A higher percentage of residents in Clayton have no formal schooling at 0.7% compared to 0.0% in Grinnell.
- In Grinnell, the rate of residents with high school diplomas is higher at 18.9% compared to 12.6% in Clayton.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Grinnell at 16.5%, compared to 5.4% in Clayton.
- A higher percentage of residents in Clayton hold a bachelor's degree or higher at 18.6% compared to 16.9% in Grinnell.
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.