Demographics details for Forest park, GA vs Keiser, AR
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Forest park, GA vs Keiser, AR.
| Data | Forest park | Keiser |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 19,400 | 713 |
| Median Age | 31.3 years | 41.6 years |
| Median Income | $41,837 | $50,136 |
| Married Families | 23.0% | 35.0% |
| Poverty Level | 10% | 12% |
| Unemployment Rate | 4.5 | 3.5 |
Population Comparison: Forest park vs Keiser
- In Forest park, the population is higher at 19,400, compared to 713 in Keiser.
- The median age in Keiser is higher at 41.6 years, compared to 31.3 years in Forest park.
- Keiser has a higher median income of $50,136, compared to $41,837 in Forest park.
- In Keiser, the percentage of married families is higher at 35.0%, compared to 23.0% in Forest park.
- The poverty level is higher in Keiser at 12%, compared to 10% in Forest park.
- The unemployment rate in Forest park is higher at 4.5%, compared to 3.5% in Keiser.
Demographics
Demographics Forest park vs Keiser provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Forest park | Keiser |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 55 | 4 |
| White | 8 | 83 |
| Asian | 6 | Data is updating |
| Hispanic | 23 | 1 |
| Two or More Races | 8 | 12 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Forest park vs Keiser
- A higher percentage of Black residents are in Forest park at 55% compared to 4% in Keiser.
- The percentage of White residents is higher in Keiser at 83% compared to 8% in Forest park.
- The Asian population is larger in Forest park at 6% compared to 0% in Keiser.
- The Hispanic community is larger in Forest park at 23% compared to 1% in Keiser.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Keiser at 12%, compared to 8% in Forest park.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Forest park and Keiser at 0%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Forest park | Keiser |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 18.3% | 20.3% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 16.0% | 14.6% |
| Depression | 17.8% | 28.9% |
| Smoking | 22.7% | 24.9% |
| Binge Drinking | 13.3% | 15.2% |
| Obesity | 43.0% | 34.9% |
| Disability Percentage | 15.0% | 27.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Forest park vs Keiser
- In Keiser, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 20.3% compared to 18.3% in Forest park.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Keiser at 28.9% versus 17.8% in Forest park.
- Keiser has a higher smoking rate at 24.9% compared to 22.7% in Forest park.
- More residents engage in binge drinking in Keiser at 15.2% compared to 13.3% in Forest park.
- Obesity rates are higher in Forest park at 43.0% compared to 34.9% in Keiser.
- There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Keiser at 27.0% compared to 15.0% in Forest park.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Forest park | Keiser |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 2.6% (504) | 6.2% (44) |
| High School Diploma | 18.4% (3,567) | 15.0% (107) |
| Less than High School | 21.7% (4,202) | 55.5% (396) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 6.4% (1,235) | 7.3% (52) |
Education Levels Comparison: Forest park vs Keiser
- In Keiser, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 6.2% compared to 2.6% in Forest park.
- A higher percentage of residents in Forest park hold a high school diploma at 18.4% compared to 15.0% in Keiser.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Keiser at 55.5%, compared to 21.7% in Forest park.
- In Keiser, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 7.3% compared to 6.4% in Forest park.
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.