Demographics details for Mcpherson, KS vs Woodburn, OR
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Mcpherson, KS vs Woodburn, OR.
| Data | Mcpherson | Woodburn |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 13,865 | 27,290 |
| Median Age | 36.2 years | 39.2 years |
| Median Income | $69,807 | $58,916 |
| Married Families | 43.0% | 35.0% |
| Poverty Level | 9% | 12% |
| Unemployment Rate | 3.3 | 3.8 |
Population Comparison: Mcpherson vs Woodburn
- The population in Woodburn is higher at 27,290, compared to 13,865 in Mcpherson.
- The median age in Woodburn is higher at 39.2 years, compared to 36.2 years in Mcpherson.
- Mcpherson has a higher median income of $69,807 compared to $58,916 in Woodburn.
- A higher percentage of married families is found in Mcpherson at 43.0% compared to 35.0% in Woodburn.
- The poverty level is higher in Woodburn at 12%, compared to 9% in Mcpherson.
- Woodburn has a higher unemployment rate at 3.8% compared to 3.3% in Mcpherson.
Demographics
Demographics Mcpherson vs Woodburn provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Mcpherson | Woodburn |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 2 | Data is updating |
| White | 87 | 22 |
| Asian | 1 | 1 |
| Hispanic | 6 | 59 |
| Two or More Races | 4 | 17 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | 1 |
Demographics Comparison: Mcpherson vs Woodburn
- A higher percentage of Black residents are in Mcpherson at 2% compared to 0% in Woodburn.
- Mcpherson has a higher percentage of White residents at 87% compared to 22% in Woodburn.
- Both Mcpherson and Woodburn have the same percentage of Asian residents at 1%.
- Woodburn has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 59%, compared to 6% in Mcpherson.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Woodburn at 17%, compared to 4% in Mcpherson.
- In Woodburn, the percentage of American Indian residents is higher at 1%, compared to 0% in Mcpherson.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Mcpherson | Woodburn |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 15.2% | 18.9% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 9.7% | 14.7% |
| Depression | 20.1% | 27.1% |
| Smoking | 17.6% | 18.0% |
| Binge Drinking | 18.2% | 14.4% |
| Obesity | 36.6% | 40.5% |
| Disability Percentage | 14.0% | 14.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Mcpherson vs Woodburn
- In Woodburn, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 18.9% compared to 15.2% in Mcpherson.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Woodburn at 27.1% versus 20.1% in Mcpherson.
- Woodburn has a higher smoking rate at 18.0% compared to 17.6% in Mcpherson.
- Binge drinking is more common in Mcpherson at 18.2% compared to 14.4% in Woodburn.
- Woodburn has higher obesity rates at 40.5% compared to 36.6% in Mcpherson.
- Disability percentages are the same in both Mcpherson and Woodburn at 14.0%.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Mcpherson | Woodburn |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.3% (48) | 3.6% (992) |
| High School Diploma | 12.8% (1,775) | 13.3% (3,628) |
| Less than High School | 5.8% (804) | 38.2% (10,414) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 21.7% (3,010) | 9.4% (2,578) |
Education Levels Comparison: Mcpherson vs Woodburn
- In Woodburn, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 3.6% compared to 0.3% in Mcpherson.
- In Woodburn, the rate of residents with high school diplomas is higher at 13.3% compared to 12.8% in Mcpherson.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Woodburn at 38.2%, compared to 5.8% in Mcpherson.
- A higher percentage of residents in Mcpherson hold a bachelor's degree or higher at 21.7% compared to 9.4% in Woodburn.
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.