Demographics details for Gibsonburg, OH vs Ephrata, WA
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Gibsonburg, OH vs Ephrata, WA.
| Data | Gibsonburg | Ephrata |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 2,436 | 8,476 |
| Median Age | 38.7 years | 33.4 years |
| Median Income | $67,279 | $57,958 |
| Married Families | 44.0% | 33.0% |
| Poverty Level | 10% | 11% |
| Unemployment Rate | 4.3 | 4.2 |
Population Comparison: Gibsonburg vs Ephrata
- The population in Ephrata is higher at 8,476, compared to 2,436 in Gibsonburg.
- Residents in Gibsonburg have a higher median age of 38.7 years compared to 33.4 years in Ephrata.
- Gibsonburg has a higher median income of $67,279 compared to $57,958 in Ephrata.
- A higher percentage of married families is found in Gibsonburg at 44.0% compared to 33.0% in Ephrata.
- The poverty level is higher in Ephrata at 11%, compared to 10% in Gibsonburg.
- The unemployment rate in Gibsonburg is higher at 4.3%, compared to 4.2% in Ephrata.
Demographics
Demographics Gibsonburg vs Ephrata provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Gibsonburg | Ephrata |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 2 | 1 |
| White | 79 | 63 |
| Asian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
| Hispanic | 10 | 25 |
| Two or More Races | 9 | 11 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Gibsonburg vs Ephrata
- A higher percentage of Black residents are in Gibsonburg at 2% compared to 1% in Ephrata.
- Gibsonburg has a higher percentage of White residents at 79% compared to 63% in Ephrata.
- Both Gibsonburg and Ephrata have the same percentage of Asian residents at 0%.
- Ephrata has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 25%, compared to 10% in Gibsonburg.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Ephrata at 11%, compared to 9% in Gibsonburg.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Gibsonburg and Ephrata at 0%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Gibsonburg | Ephrata |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 17.6% | 18.0% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 12.3% | 12.7% |
| Depression | 23.0% | 27.0% |
| Smoking | 21.9% | 17.0% |
| Binge Drinking | 18.4% | 17.6% |
| Obesity | 42.4% | 35.1% |
| Disability Percentage | 11.0% | 8.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Gibsonburg vs Ephrata
- In Ephrata, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 18.0% compared to 17.6% in Gibsonburg.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Ephrata at 27.0% versus 23.0% in Gibsonburg.
- Smoking is more prevalent in Gibsonburg at 21.9% compared to 17.0% in Ephrata.
- Binge drinking is more common in Gibsonburg at 18.4% compared to 17.6% in Ephrata.
- Obesity rates are higher in Gibsonburg at 42.4% compared to 35.1% in Ephrata.
- Disability percentages are higher in Gibsonburg at 11.0% compared to 8.0% in Ephrata.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Gibsonburg | Ephrata |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.2% (4) | 0.8% (65) |
| High School Diploma | 35.6% (867) | 17.7% (1,503) |
| Less than High School | 5.1% (125) | 14.4% (1,223) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 11.3% (275) | 8.0% (677) |
Education Levels Comparison: Gibsonburg vs Ephrata
- In Ephrata, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 0.8% compared to 0.2% in Gibsonburg.
- A higher percentage of residents in Gibsonburg hold a high school diploma at 35.6% compared to 17.7% in Ephrata.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Ephrata at 14.4%, compared to 5.1% in Gibsonburg.
- A higher percentage of residents in Gibsonburg hold a bachelor's degree or higher at 11.3% compared to 8.0% in Ephrata.
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.