Demographics details for Grinnell, KS vs Hoover, AL
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Grinnell, KS vs Hoover, AL.
| Data | Grinnell | Hoover |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 254 | 92,435 |
| Median Age | 37.9 years | 38.3 years |
| Median Income | $56,042 | $101,765 |
| Married Families | 58.0% | 46.0% |
| Poverty Level | 12% | 7% |
| Unemployment Rate | 3.2 | 2.2 |
Population Comparison: Grinnell vs Hoover
- The population in Hoover is higher at 92,435, compared to 254 in Grinnell.
- The median age in Hoover is higher at 38.3 years, compared to 37.9 years in Grinnell.
- Hoover has a higher median income of $101,765, compared to $56,042 in Grinnell.
- A higher percentage of married families is found in Grinnell at 58.0% compared to 46.0% in Hoover.
- Grinnell has a higher poverty level at 12% compared to 7% in Hoover.
- The unemployment rate in Grinnell is higher at 3.2%, compared to 2.2% in Hoover.
Demographics
Demographics Grinnell vs Hoover provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Grinnell | Hoover |
|---|---|---|
| Black | Data is updating | 20 |
| White | 100 | 67 |
| Asian | Data is updating | 5 |
| Hispanic | Data is updating | 5 |
| Two or More Races | Data is updating | 3 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Grinnell vs Hoover
- In Hoover, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 20% compared to 0% in Grinnell.
- Grinnell has a higher percentage of White residents at 100% compared to 67% in Hoover.
- In Hoover, the Asian population stands at 5%, greater than 0% in Grinnell.
- Hoover has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 5%, compared to 0% in Grinnell.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Hoover at 3%, compared to 0% in Grinnell.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Grinnell and Hoover at 0%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Grinnell | Hoover |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 15.1% | 14.9% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 9.6% | 8.6% |
| Depression | 20.1% | 21.3% |
| Smoking | 17.6% | 11.0% |
| Binge Drinking | 20.4% | 16.7% |
| Obesity | 38.3% | 32.1% |
| Disability Percentage | 15.0% | 9.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Grinnell vs Hoover
- More residents in Grinnell report poor mental health at 15.1% compared to 14.9% in Hoover.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Hoover at 21.3% versus 20.1% in Grinnell.
- Smoking is more prevalent in Grinnell at 17.6% compared to 11.0% in Hoover.
- Binge drinking is more common in Grinnell at 20.4% compared to 16.7% in Hoover.
- Obesity rates are higher in Grinnell at 38.3% compared to 32.1% in Hoover.
- Disability percentages are higher in Grinnell at 15.0% compared to 9.0% in Hoover.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Grinnell | Hoover |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.0% (Data is updating) | 0.6% (583) |
| High School Diploma | 18.9% (48) | 7.3% (6,787) |
| Less than High School | 16.5% (42) | 3.8% (3,478) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 16.9% (43) | 41.1% (38,000) |
Education Levels Comparison: Grinnell vs Hoover
- In Hoover, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 0.6% compared to 0.0% in Grinnell.
- A higher percentage of residents in Grinnell hold a high school diploma at 18.9% compared to 7.3% in Hoover.
- More residents in Grinnell have less than a high school education at 16.5% compared to 3.8% in Hoover.
- In Hoover, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 41.1% 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.