Demographics details for Summerfield, NC vs Fort washington, MD

Population Overview

Compare main population characteristics in Summerfield, NC vs Fort washington, MD.

Data Summerfield Fort washington
Population 11,111 25,825
Median Age 45.1 years 44.1 years
Median Income $148,182 $143,623
Married Families 52.0% 43.0%
Poverty Level 7% 5%
Unemployment Rate 3.4 3.5

Population Comparison: Summerfield vs Fort washington

  • The population in Fort washington is higher at 25,825, compared to 11,111 in Summerfield.
  • Residents in Summerfield have a higher median age of 45.1 years compared to 44.1 years in Fort washington.
  • Summerfield has a higher median income of $148,182 compared to $143,623 in Fort washington.
  • A higher percentage of married families is found in Summerfield at 52.0% compared to 43.0% in Fort washington.
  • Summerfield has a higher poverty level at 7% compared to 5% in Fort washington.
  • Fort washington has a higher unemployment rate at 3.5% compared to 3.4% in Summerfield.

Demographics

Demographics Summerfield vs Fort washington provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.

Demographic Summerfield Fort washington
Black 5 61
White 82 8
Asian 4 8
Hispanic 5 17
Two or More Races 4 6
American Indian Data is updating Data is updating

Demographics Comparison: Summerfield vs Fort washington

  • In Fort washington, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 61% compared to 5% in Summerfield.
  • Summerfield has a higher percentage of White residents at 82% compared to 8% in Fort washington.
  • In Fort washington, the Asian population stands at 8%, greater than 4% in Summerfield.
  • Fort washington has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 17%, compared to 5% in Summerfield.
  • The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Fort washington at 6%, compared to 4% in Summerfield.
  • The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Summerfield and Fort washington at 0%.

Health Statistics

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

Health Metric Summerfield Fort washington
Mental Health Not Good 13.0% 12.5%
Physical Health Not Good 8.2% 7.9%
Depression 22.6% 11.6%
Smoking 10.6% 9.6%
Binge Drinking 19.5% 12.0%
Obesity 28.7% 37.7%
Disability Percentage 12.0% 9.0%

Health Statistics Comparison: Summerfield vs Fort washington

  • More residents in Summerfield report poor mental health at 13.0% compared to 12.5% in Fort washington.
  • Depression is more prevalent in Summerfield at 22.6% compared to 11.6% in Fort washington.
  • Smoking is more prevalent in Summerfield at 10.6% compared to 9.6% in Fort washington.
  • Binge drinking is more common in Summerfield at 19.5% compared to 12.0% in Fort washington.
  • Fort washington has higher obesity rates at 37.7% compared to 28.7% in Summerfield.
  • Disability percentages are higher in Summerfield at 12.0% compared to 9.0% in Fort washington.

Education Levels

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

Education Level Summerfield Fort washington
No Schooling 1.0% (109) 1.2% (297)
High School Diploma 8.8% (973) 14.4% (3,710)
Less than High School 6.1% (674) 8.3% (2,138)
Bachelor's Degree and Higher 38.9% (4,326) 31.8% (8,208)

Education Levels Comparison: Summerfield vs Fort washington

  • In Fort washington, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 1.2% compared to 1.0% in Summerfield.
  • In Fort washington, the rate of residents with high school diplomas is higher at 14.4% compared to 8.8% in Summerfield.
  • The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Fort washington at 8.3%, compared to 6.1% in Summerfield.
  • A higher percentage of residents in Summerfield hold a bachelor's degree or higher at 38.9% compared to 31.8% in Fort washington.

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.