Demographics details for Covina, CA vs Parker, KS
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Covina, CA vs Parker, KS.
Data | Covina | Parker |
---|---|---|
Population | 49,489 | 233 |
Median Age | 37.6 years | 37.8 years |
Median Income | $89,650 | $80,250 |
Married Families | 38.0% | 73.0% |
Poverty Level | 12% | 8% |
Unemployment Rate | 6.0 | 3.2 |
Population Comparison: Covina vs Parker
- In Covina, the population is higher at 49,489, compared to 233 in Parker.
- The median age in Parker is higher at 37.8 years, compared to 37.6 years in Covina.
- Covina has a higher median income of $89,650 compared to $80,250 in Parker.
- In Parker, the percentage of married families is higher at 73.0%, compared to 38.0% in Covina.
- Covina has a higher poverty level at 12% compared to 8% in Parker.
- The unemployment rate in Covina is higher at 6.0%, compared to 3.2% in Parker.
Demographics
Demographics Covina vs Parker provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
Demographic | Covina | Parker |
---|---|---|
Black | 4 | Data is updating |
White | 18 | 78 |
Asian | 14 | Data is updating |
Hispanic | 63 | 14 |
Two or More Races | 19 | 8 |
American Indian | 1 | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Covina vs Parker
- A higher percentage of Black residents are in Covina at 4% compared to 0% in Parker.
- The percentage of White residents is higher in Parker at 78% compared to 18% in Covina.
- The Asian population is larger in Covina at 14% compared to 0% in Parker.
- The Hispanic community is larger in Covina at 63% compared to 14% in Parker.
- More residents identify as two or more races in Covina at 19% compared to 8% in Parker.
- A greater percentage of American Indian residents live in Covina at 1% compared to 0% in Parker.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
Health Metric | Covina | Parker |
---|---|---|
Mental Health Not Good | 15.1% | 17.4% |
Physical Health Not Good | 10.9% | 11.6% |
Depression | 15.9% | 22.1% |
Smoking | 10.5% | 21.7% |
Binge Drinking | 15.6% | 18.4% |
Obesity | 28.2% | 39.1% |
Disability Percentage | 12.0% | 21.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Covina vs Parker
- In Parker, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 17.4% compared to 15.1% in Covina.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Parker at 22.1% versus 15.9% in Covina.
- Parker has a higher smoking rate at 21.7% compared to 10.5% in Covina.
- More residents engage in binge drinking in Parker at 18.4% compared to 15.6% in Covina.
- Parker has higher obesity rates at 39.1% compared to 28.2% in Covina.
- There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Parker at 21.0% compared to 12.0% in Covina.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
Education Level | Covina | Parker |
---|---|---|
No Schooling | 1.5% (753) | 5.6% (13) |
High School Diploma | 17.4% (8,620) | 37.8% (88) |
Less than High School | 17.2% (8,533) | 22.3% (52) |
Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 18.7% (9,254) | 11.6% (27) |
Education Levels Comparison: Covina vs Parker
- In Parker, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 5.6% compared to 1.5% in Covina.
- In Parker, the rate of residents with high school diplomas is higher at 37.8% compared to 17.4% in Covina.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Parker at 22.3%, compared to 17.2% in Covina.
- A higher percentage of residents in Covina hold a bachelor's degree or higher at 18.7% compared to 11.6% in Parker.
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.