Search for Indicators
Disparities Dashboard
Indicator Gauge Icon Legend
Legend Colors
Red is bad, green is good, blue is not statistically different/neutral.
Compared to Distribution
the value is in the best half of communities.
the value is in the 2nd worst quarter of communities.
the value is in the worst quarter of communities.
Compared to Target
meets target; 
does not meet target.
Compared to a Single Value
lower than the comparison value;
higher than the comparison value;
not statistically different from comparison value.
Trend
non-significant change over time; 
significant change over time; 
no change over time.
Compared to Prior Value
higher than the previous measurement period;
lower than the previous measurement period;
no statistically different change from previous measurement period.
Significantly better than the overall value
Significantly worse than the overall value
Significantly different than the overall value
No significant difference with the overall value
No data on significance available
Health / Alcohol & Drug Use
Health / Alcohol & Drug Use
Age-Adjusted Drug and Opioid-Involved Overdose Death Rate
Value
Compared to:
Age-Adjusted Drug and Opioid-Involved Overdose Death Rate County: Allen
Age-Adjusted Drug and Opioid-Involved Overdose Death Rate County: Allen
29.8
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,303 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(29.6)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(23.5)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(28.6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Death Rate due to Drug Poisoning County: Allen
Death Rate due to Drug Poisoning County: Allen
33.0
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2019-2021)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,899 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(33.7)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(27.2)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
HP 2030 Target
(20.7)
<div>SU-03: Reduce drug overdose deaths <strong>(LEADING HEALTH INDICATOR)</strong></div>
Health / Cancer
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Breast Cancer County: Allen
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Breast Cancer County: Allen
21.5
Deaths per 100,000 females
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,755 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(20.4)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(19.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(21.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(15.3)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Colorectal Cancer County: Allen
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Colorectal Cancer County: Allen
12.8
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,174 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(14.6)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(13.1)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12.2)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.9)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Adams
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Adams
42.6
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(43.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Allen
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Allen
39.1
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(41.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: DeKalb
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: DeKalb
49.0
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(53.3)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Huntington
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Huntington
45.3
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(46.9)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Kosciusko
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Kosciusko
43.7
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(44.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: LaGrange
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: LaGrange
47.2
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(46.3)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Noble
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Noble
49.9
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(52.3)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Wabash
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Wabash
46.4
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(44.8)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Wells
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Wells
39.7
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(43.1)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Whitley
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Whitley
47.8
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(52.2)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Prostate Cancer County: Allen
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Prostate Cancer County: Allen
25.3
Deaths per 100,000 males
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,576 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(19.5)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(18.8)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(25.2)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(16.9)
Breast Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen
Breast Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen
124.8
Cases per 100,000 females
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,706 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(124.3)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(128.1)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(122.8)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Adams
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Adams
11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(11.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Allen
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Allen
12.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(11.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Cancer: Medicare Population County: DeKalb
Cancer: Medicare Population County: DeKalb
11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(10.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Huntington
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Huntington
10.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(11.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko
11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(11.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Cancer: Medicare Population County: LaGrange
Cancer: Medicare Population County: LaGrange
9.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Noble
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Noble
10.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(10.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Wabash
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Wabash
11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(10.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Wells
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Wells
11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(11.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Whitley
Cancer: Medicare Population County: Whitley
11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(11.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Adams
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Adams
34.9
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(37.8)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen
37.5
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(37.9)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: DeKalb
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: DeKalb
48.0
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(49.4)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Huntington
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Huntington
45.2
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(49.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Kosciusko
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Kosciusko
42.9
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(45.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: LaGrange
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: LaGrange
36.1
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(33.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Noble
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Noble
38.0
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(36.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wabash
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wabash
52.8
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(51.1)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wells
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wells
41.7
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(43.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Whitley
Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Whitley
44.1
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(45.1)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Adams
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Adams
62.8
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(59.6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen
63.4
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(65.2)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: DeKalb
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: DeKalb
80.5
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(82.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Huntington
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Huntington
66.5
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(66.1)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Kosciusko
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Kosciusko
71.6
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(72.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: LaGrange
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: LaGrange
72.5
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(62.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Noble
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Noble
79.1
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(78.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wabash
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wabash
66.7
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(62.6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wells
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wells
60.9
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(68.8)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Whitley
Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Whitley
72.4
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(79.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Allen
Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Allen
49.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,123 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(49.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(47.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(46.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko
Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko
48.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,123 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(49.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(47.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(46.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Noble
Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Noble
43.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,123 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(49.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(47.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(43.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Oral Cavity and Pharynx Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen
Oral Cavity and Pharynx Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen
12.2
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,862 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(12.7)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12.3)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Prostate Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen
Prostate Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen
97.6
Cases per 100,000 males
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,712 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(99.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(109.9)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(97.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Health / Diabetes
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Adams
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Adams
7.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(7.7%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Allen
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Allen
10.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(9.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: DeKalb
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: DeKalb
8.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(8.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Huntington
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Huntington
10.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(10.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Kosciusko
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Kosciusko
8.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(9.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: LaGrange
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: LaGrange
8.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(8.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Noble
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Noble
9.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(8.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Wabash
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Wabash
9.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(9.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Wells
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Wells
8.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(7.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Whitley
Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Whitley
8.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(7.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Allen
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Allen
34.6
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,937 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(22.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(29.4)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Kosciusko
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Kosciusko
39.0
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,937 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(22.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(35.2)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Noble
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Noble
31.4
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,937 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(22.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(28.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Wabash
Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Wabash
52.8
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,937 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(22.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(42.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Adams
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Adams
27.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(28.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Allen
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Allen
24.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(24.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: DeKalb
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: DeKalb
25.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(26.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Huntington
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Huntington
27.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(27.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko
25.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(25.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: LaGrange
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: LaGrange
24.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(24.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Noble
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Noble
26.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(26.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Wabash
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Wabash
29.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(28.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Wells
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Wells
27.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(28.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Whitley
Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Whitley
26.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(26.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Health / Disabilities
Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty County: Allen
Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty County: Allen
4.9%
(2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(6.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty County: Kosciusko
Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty County: Kosciusko
4.3%
(2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(5.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
5.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
Allen, IN County Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
IN Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability County: Adams
Children with a Disability County: Adams
3.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability County: Allen
Children with a Disability County: Allen
4.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability County: DeKalb
Children with a Disability County: DeKalb
6.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability County: Huntington
Children with a Disability County: Huntington
3.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability County: Kosciusko
Children with a Disability County: Kosciusko
6.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability County: LaGrange
Children with a Disability County: LaGrange
1.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability County: Noble
Children with a Disability County: Noble
4.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability County: Wabash
Children with a Disability County: Wabash
4.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability County: Wells
Children with a Disability County: Wells
3.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability County: Whitley
Children with a Disability County: Whitley
4.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Children with a Disability Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
Children with a Disability Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
5.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Allen, IN County Value
(4.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Adams
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Adams
4.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Allen
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Allen
5.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: DeKalb
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: DeKalb
5.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Huntington
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Huntington
5.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Kosciusko
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Kosciusko
5.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: LaGrange
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: LaGrange
4.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Noble
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Noble
5.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Wabash
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Wabash
5.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Wells
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Wells
4.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Whitley
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Whitley
4.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
6.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Allen, IN County Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Disability County: Adams
Persons with a Disability County: Adams
11.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Disability County: Allen
Persons with a Disability County: Allen
12.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Disability County: DeKalb
Persons with a Disability County: DeKalb
13.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Disability County: Huntington
Persons with a Disability County: Huntington
14.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Disability County: Kosciusko
Persons with a Disability County: Kosciusko
13.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Disability County: LaGrange
Persons with a Disability County: LaGrange
10.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Disability County: Noble
Persons with a Disability County: Noble
13.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Disability County: Wabash
Persons with a Disability County: Wabash
15.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Disability County: Wells
Persons with a Disability County: Wells
12.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Disability County: Whitley
Persons with a Disability County: Whitley
13.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Disability Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
Persons with a Disability Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
13.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Allen, IN County Value
(12.3%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Adams
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Adams
3.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Allen
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Allen
3.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: DeKalb
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: DeKalb
4.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Huntington
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Huntington
4.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Kosciusko
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Kosciusko
4.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: LaGrange
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: LaGrange
4.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Noble
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Noble
3.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Wabash
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Wabash
4.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Wells
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Wells
3.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Whitley
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Whitley
5.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
Persons with a Hearing Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
3.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Allen, IN County Value
(3.2%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Adams
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Adams
2.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Allen
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Allen
2.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: DeKalb
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: DeKalb
2.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Huntington
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Huntington
2.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Kosciusko
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Kosciusko
2.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: LaGrange
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: LaGrange
1.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Noble
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Noble
2.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Wabash
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Wabash
2.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Wells
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Wells
1.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Whitley
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Whitley
1.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
2.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Allen, IN County Value
(2.3%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Adams
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Adams
2.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Allen
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Allen
1.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: DeKalb
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: DeKalb
2.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Huntington
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Huntington
3.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Kosciusko
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Kosciusko
2.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: LaGrange
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: LaGrange
1.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Noble
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Noble
2.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Wabash
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Wabash
2.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Wells
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Wells
2.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Whitley
Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Whitley
3.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with a Vision Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
Persons with a Vision Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne
2.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Allen, IN County Value
(1.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Adams
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Adams
6.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(7.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Allen
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Allen
6.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(7.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: DeKalb
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: DeKalb
6.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(7.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Huntington
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Huntington
7.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(7.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Kosciusko
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Kosciusko
6.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(7.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: LaGrange
Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: LaGrange
5.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
IN Value
(7.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
