Demographics details for Jurupa valley, CA vs Pleasant grove, UT

Population Overview

Compare main population characteristics in Jurupa valley, CA vs Pleasant grove, UT.

Data Jurupa valley Pleasant grove
Population 107,609 37,630
Median Age 33.5 years 27.6 years
Median Income $91,562 $91,322
Married Families 34.0% 45.0%
Poverty Level 12% 7%
Unemployment Rate 4.9 3.6

Population Comparison: Jurupa valley vs Pleasant grove

  • In Jurupa valley, the population is higher at 107,609, compared to 37,630 in Pleasant grove.
  • Residents in Jurupa valley have a higher median age of 33.5 years compared to 27.6 years in Pleasant grove.
  • Jurupa valley has a higher median income of $91,562 compared to $91,322 in Pleasant grove.
  • In Pleasant grove, the percentage of married families is higher at 45.0%, compared to 34.0% in Jurupa valley.
  • Jurupa valley has a higher poverty level at 12% compared to 7% in Pleasant grove.
  • The unemployment rate in Jurupa valley is higher at 4.9%, compared to 3.6% in Pleasant grove.

Demographics

Demographics Jurupa valley vs Pleasant grove provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.

Demographic Jurupa valley Pleasant grove
Black 3 Data is updating
White 8 81
Asian 4 2
Hispanic 71 10
Two or More Races 13 7
American Indian 1 Data is updating

Demographics Comparison: Jurupa valley vs Pleasant grove

  • A higher percentage of Black residents are in Jurupa valley at 3% compared to 0% in Pleasant grove.
  • The percentage of White residents is higher in Pleasant grove at 81% compared to 8% in Jurupa valley.
  • The Asian population is larger in Jurupa valley at 4% compared to 2% in Pleasant grove.
  • The Hispanic community is larger in Jurupa valley at 71% compared to 10% in Pleasant grove.
  • More residents identify as two or more races in Jurupa valley at 13% compared to 7% in Pleasant grove.
  • A greater percentage of American Indian residents live in Jurupa valley at 1% compared to 0% in Pleasant grove.

Health Statistics

The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.

Health Metric Jurupa valley Pleasant grove
Mental Health Not Good 16.7% 14.8%
Physical Health Not Good 13.3% 10.3%
Depression 17.4% 23.9%
Smoking 14.6% 7.2%
Binge Drinking 16.1% 8.3%
Obesity 38.4% 30.6%
Disability Percentage 9.0% 9.0%

Health Statistics Comparison: Jurupa valley vs Pleasant grove

  • More residents in Jurupa valley report poor mental health at 16.7% compared to 14.8% in Pleasant grove.
  • Higher depression rates are seen in Pleasant grove at 23.9% versus 17.4% in Jurupa valley.
  • Smoking is more prevalent in Jurupa valley at 14.6% compared to 7.2% in Pleasant grove.
  • Binge drinking is more common in Jurupa valley at 16.1% compared to 8.3% in Pleasant grove.
  • Obesity rates are higher in Jurupa valley at 38.4% compared to 30.6% in Pleasant grove.
  • Disability percentages are the same in both Jurupa valley and Pleasant grove at 9.0%.

Education Levels

The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.

Education Level Jurupa valley Pleasant grove
No Schooling 3.1% (3,376) 0.6% (207)
High School Diploma 17.3% (18,582) 8.2% (3,089)
Less than High School 34.3% (36,892) 4.9% (1,844)
Bachelor's Degree and Higher 9.0% (9,706) 22.1% (8,335)

Education Levels Comparison: Jurupa valley vs Pleasant grove

  • A higher percentage of residents in Jurupa valley have no formal schooling at 3.1% compared to 0.6% in Pleasant grove.
  • A higher percentage of residents in Jurupa valley hold a high school diploma at 17.3% compared to 8.2% in Pleasant grove.
  • More residents in Jurupa valley have less than a high school education at 34.3% compared to 4.9% in Pleasant grove.
  • In Pleasant grove, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 22.1% compared to 9.0% in Jurupa valley.

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.