Demographics details for Port lavaca, TX vs Forest, MS
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Port lavaca, TX vs Forest, MS.
| Data | Port lavaca | Forest |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 11,262 | 5,330 |
| Median Age | 34.8 years | 36.4 years |
| Median Income | $58,871 | $50,093 |
| Married Families | 42.0% | 35.0% |
| Poverty Level | 15% | 18% |
| Unemployment Rate | 4.2 | 4.5 |
Population Comparison: Port lavaca vs Forest
- In Port lavaca, the population is higher at 11,262, compared to 5,330 in Forest.
- The median age in Forest is higher at 36.4 years, compared to 34.8 years in Port lavaca.
- Port lavaca has a higher median income of $58,871 compared to $50,093 in Forest.
- A higher percentage of married families is found in Port lavaca at 42.0% compared to 35.0% in Forest.
- The poverty level is higher in Forest at 18%, compared to 15% in Port lavaca.
- Forest has a higher unemployment rate at 4.5% compared to 4.2% in Port lavaca.
Demographics
Demographics Port lavaca vs Forest provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Port lavaca | Forest |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 5 | 43 |
| White | 6 | 24 |
| Asian | 7 | Data is updating |
| Hispanic | 64 | 30 |
| Two or More Races | 18 | 3 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Port lavaca vs Forest
- In Forest, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 43% compared to 5% in Port lavaca.
- The percentage of White residents is higher in Forest at 24% compared to 6% in Port lavaca.
- The Asian population is larger in Port lavaca at 7% compared to 0% in Forest.
- The Hispanic community is larger in Port lavaca at 64% compared to 30% in Forest.
- More residents identify as two or more races in Port lavaca at 18% compared to 3% in Forest.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Port lavaca and Forest at 0%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Port lavaca | Forest |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 17.3% | 18.9% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 13.3% | 16.8% |
| Depression | 21.5% | 21.2% |
| Smoking | 17.5% | 26.1% |
| Binge Drinking | 16.9% | 11.8% |
| Obesity | 38.4% | 45.7% |
| Disability Percentage | 18.0% | 20.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Port lavaca vs Forest
- In Forest, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 18.9% compared to 17.3% in Port lavaca.
- Depression is more prevalent in Port lavaca at 21.5% compared to 21.2% in Forest.
- Forest has a higher smoking rate at 26.1% compared to 17.5% in Port lavaca.
- Binge drinking is more common in Port lavaca at 16.9% compared to 11.8% in Forest.
- Forest has higher obesity rates at 45.7% compared to 38.4% in Port lavaca.
- There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Forest at 20.0% compared to 18.0% in Port lavaca.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Port lavaca | Forest |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 2.0% (230) | 4.4% (232) |
| High School Diploma | 21.3% (2,404) | 10.5% (557) |
| Less than High School | 24.2% (2,728) | 33.4% (1,779) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 9.7% (1,091) | 8.5% (455) |
Education Levels Comparison: Port lavaca vs Forest
- In Forest, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 4.4% compared to 2.0% in Port lavaca.
- A higher percentage of residents in Port lavaca hold a high school diploma at 21.3% compared to 10.5% in Forest.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Forest at 33.4%, compared to 24.2% in Port lavaca.
- A higher percentage of residents in Port lavaca hold a bachelor's degree or higher at 9.7% compared to 8.5% in Forest.
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.