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

an indicator guage with the arrow in the green the value is in the best half of communities.

an indicator guage with the arrow in the yellow the value is in the 2nd worst quarter of communities.

an indicator guage with the arrow in the red the value is in the worst quarter of communities.

Compared to Target

green circle with white tick inside it meets target; red circle with white cross inside it does not meet target.

Compared to a Single Value

green diamond with downward arrow inside it lower than the comparison value; red diamond with downward arrow inside it higher than the comparison value; blue diamond with downward arrow inside it not statistically different from comparison value.

Trend

green square outline with upward trending arrow inside it green square outline with downward trending arrow inside it non-significant change over time; green square with upward trending arrow inside it green square with downward trending arrow inside it significant change over time; blue square with equals sign no change over time.

Compared to Prior Value

green triangle with upward trending arrow inside it higher than the previous measurement period; green triangle with downward trending arrow inside it lower than the previous measurement period; blue equals sign no statistically different change  from previous measurement period.

green chart bars Significantly better than the overall value

red chart bars Significantly worse than the overall value

dark blue chart bars Significantly different than the overall value

light blue chart bars No significant difference with the overall value

gray chart bars No data on significance available

More information about the gauges and icons

Health / Alcohol & Drug Use

Health / Alcohol & Drug Use

Health / Alcohol & Drug Use

Age-Adjusted Drug and Opioid-Involved Overdose Death Rate

Value
Compared to:

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

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Drug and Opioid-Involved Overdose Death Rate County: Allen

29.8
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 29.8 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 35.8.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,303 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (29.6), Allen has a value of 29.8 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(29.6)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (23.5), Allen has a value of 29.8 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(23.5)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (29.8) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (28.6).
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Alcohol & Drug Use

Death Rate due to Drug Poisoning

Value
Compared to:

Health / Alcohol & Drug Use

Death Rate due to Drug Poisoning

Value
Compared to:

Death Rate due to Drug Poisoning County: Allen

Current Value:

Death Rate due to Drug Poisoning County: Allen

33.0
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2019-2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 33.0 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.2 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 35.8.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,899 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (33.7), Allen has a value of 33.0 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(33.7)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (27.2), Allen has a value of 33.0 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(27.2)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (20.7), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(20.7)
<div>SU-03: Reduce drug overdose deaths <strong>(LEADING HEALTH INDICATOR)</strong></div>
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Cancer

Health / Cancer

Health / Cancer

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Breast Cancer

Value
Compared to:

Health / Cancer

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Breast Cancer

Value
Compared to:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Breast Cancer County: Allen

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Breast Cancer County: Allen

21.5
Deaths per 100,000 females
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 21.5 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 20.4 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 23.3.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,755 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (20.4), Allen has a value of 21.5 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(20.4)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (19.6), Allen has a value of 21.5 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(19.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (21.5) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (21.7).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (15.3), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(15.3)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Cancer

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Colorectal Cancer

Value
Compared to:

Health / Cancer

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Colorectal Cancer

Value
Compared to:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Colorectal Cancer County: Allen

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Colorectal Cancer County: Allen

12.8
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 12.8 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 14.7 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 17.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,174 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (14.6), Allen has a value of 12.8 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(14.6)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (13.1), Allen has a value of 12.8 which is lower and better.
US Value
(13.1)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (12.8) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (12.2).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (8.9), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(8.9)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Cancer

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer

Value
Compared to:

Health / Cancer

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer

Value
Compared to:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Adams

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Adams

42.6
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Adams has a value of 42.6 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 42.5 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 50.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (44.9), Adams has a value of 42.6 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (35.0), Adams has a value of 42.6 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Adams (42.6) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (43.7).
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.
Over time, the Adams value is increasing significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (25.1), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Allen

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Allen

39.1
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 39.1 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 42.5 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 50.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (44.9), Allen has a value of 39.1 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (35.0), Allen has a value of 39.1 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (39.1) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (41.0).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (25.1), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: DeKalb

49.0
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, DeKalb has a value of 49.0 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 42.5 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 50.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (44.9), DeKalb has a value of 49.0 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (35.0), DeKalb has a value of 49.0 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, DeKalb (49.0) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (53.3).
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.
Over time, the DeKalb value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (25.1), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Huntington

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Huntington

45.3
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Huntington has a value of 45.3 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 42.5 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 50.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (44.9), Huntington has a value of 45.3 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (35.0), Huntington has a value of 45.3 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Huntington (45.3) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (46.9).
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.
Over time, the Huntington value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (25.1), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Kosciusko

43.7
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Kosciusko has a value of 43.7 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 42.5 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 50.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (44.9), Kosciusko has a value of 43.7 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (35.0), Kosciusko has a value of 43.7 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Kosciusko (43.7) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (44.5).
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.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (25.1), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: LaGrange

47.2
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, LaGrange has a value of 47.2 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 42.5 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 50.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (44.9), LaGrange has a value of 47.2 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (35.0), LaGrange has a value of 47.2 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, LaGrange (47.2) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (46.3).
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.
Over time, the LaGrange value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (25.1), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Noble

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Noble

49.9
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Noble has a value of 49.9 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 42.5 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 50.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (44.9), Noble has a value of 49.9 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (35.0), Noble has a value of 49.9 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Noble (49.9) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (52.3).
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.
Over time, the Noble value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (25.1), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Wabash

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Wabash

46.4
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wabash has a value of 46.4 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 42.5 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 50.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (44.9), Wabash has a value of 46.4 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (35.0), Wabash has a value of 46.4 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Wabash (46.4) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (44.8).
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.
Over time, the Wabash value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (25.1), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Wells

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Wells

39.7
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wells has a value of 39.7 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 42.5 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 50.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (44.9), Wells has a value of 39.7 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (35.0), Wells has a value of 39.7 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Wells (39.7) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (43.1).
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.
Over time, the Wells value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (25.1), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Whitley

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer County: Whitley

47.8
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Whitley has a value of 47.8 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 42.5 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 50.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,752 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (44.9), Whitley has a value of 47.8 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(44.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (35.0), Whitley has a value of 47.8 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(35.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Whitley (47.8) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (52.2).
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.
Over time, the Whitley value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (25.1), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Cancer

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Prostate Cancer

Value
Compared to:

Health / Cancer

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Prostate Cancer

Value
Compared to:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Prostate Cancer County: Allen

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Prostate Cancer County: Allen

25.3
Deaths per 100,000 males
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 25.3 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 19.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 22.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,576 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (19.5), Allen has a value of 25.3 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(19.5)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (18.8), Allen has a value of 25.3 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(18.8)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (25.3) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (25.2).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing significantly.
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.
Compared to the HP 2030 Target (16.9), the target has not been met.
HP 2030 Target
(16.9)
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Cancer

Breast Cancer Incidence Rate

Value
Compared to:

Health / Cancer

Breast Cancer Incidence Rate

Value
Compared to:

Breast Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen

Current Value:

Breast Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen

124.8
Cases per 100,000 females
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 124.8 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 122.7 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 134.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,706 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (124.3), Allen has a value of 124.8 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(124.3)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (128.1), Allen has a value of 124.8 which is lower and better.
US Value
(128.1)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (124.8) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (122.8).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Cancer

Cancer: Medicare Population

Value
Compared to:

Health / Cancer

Cancer: Medicare Population

Value
Compared to:

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Adams

Current Value:

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Adams

11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Adams has a value of 11.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (11.0%), Adams has a value of 11.0%.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.0%), Adams has a value of 11.0% which is lower and better.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Adams (11.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (11.0%).
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.
Over time, the Adams value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Allen

Current Value:

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Allen

12.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 12.0% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (11.0%), Allen has a value of 12.0% which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.0%), Allen has a value of 12.0%.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (12.0%) is greater and worse than the previously measured value (11.0%).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Cancer: Medicare Population County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Cancer: Medicare Population County: DeKalb

11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, DeKalb has a value of 11.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (11.0%), DeKalb has a value of 11.0%.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.0%), DeKalb has a value of 11.0% which is lower and better.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, DeKalb (11.0%) is greater and worse than the previously measured value (10.0%).
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.
Over time, the DeKalb value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Huntington

Current Value:

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Huntington

10.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Huntington has a value of 10.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (11.0%), Huntington has a value of 10.0% which is lower and better.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.0%), Huntington has a value of 10.0% which is lower and better.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Huntington (10.0%) is less and better than the previously measured value (11.0%).
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.
Over time, the Huntington value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko

11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Kosciusko has a value of 11.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (11.0%), Kosciusko has a value of 11.0%.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.0%), Kosciusko has a value of 11.0% which is lower and better.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Kosciusko (11.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (11.0%).
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.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Cancer: Medicare Population County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Cancer: Medicare Population County: LaGrange

9.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, LaGrange has a value of 9.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (11.0%), LaGrange has a value of 9.0% which is lower and better.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.0%), LaGrange has a value of 9.0% which is lower and better.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, LaGrange (9.0%) is greater and worse than the previously measured value (8.0%).
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.
Over time, the LaGrange value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Noble

Current Value:

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Noble

10.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Noble has a value of 10.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (11.0%), Noble has a value of 10.0% which is lower and better.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.0%), Noble has a value of 10.0% which is lower and better.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Noble (10.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (10.0%).
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.
Over time, the Noble value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Wabash

Current Value:

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Wabash

11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wabash has a value of 11.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (11.0%), Wabash has a value of 11.0%.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.0%), Wabash has a value of 11.0% which is lower and better.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Wabash (11.0%) is greater and worse than the previously measured value (10.0%).
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.
Over time, the Wabash value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Wells

Current Value:

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Wells

11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wells has a value of 11.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (11.0%), Wells has a value of 11.0%.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.0%), Wells has a value of 11.0% which is lower and better.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Wells (11.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (11.0%).
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.
Over time, the Wells value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Whitley

Current Value:

Cancer: Medicare Population County: Whitley

11.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Whitley has a value of 11.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (11.0%), Whitley has a value of 11.0%.
IN Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.0%), Whitley has a value of 11.0% which is lower and better.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Whitley (11.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (11.0%).
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.
Over time, the Whitley value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Cancer

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate

Value
Compared to:

Health / Cancer

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate

Value
Compared to:

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Adams

Current Value:

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Adams

34.9
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Adams has a value of 34.9 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 41.1 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 47.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (41.1), Adams has a value of 34.9 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (37.7), Adams has a value of 34.9 which is lower and better.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Adams (34.9) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (37.8).
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.
Over time, the Adams value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen

Current Value:

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen

37.5
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 37.5 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 41.1 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 47.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (41.1), Allen has a value of 37.5 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (37.7), Allen has a value of 37.5 which is lower and better.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (37.5) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (37.9).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: DeKalb

48.0
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, DeKalb has a value of 48.0 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 41.1 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 47.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (41.1), DeKalb has a value of 48.0 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (37.7), DeKalb has a value of 48.0 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, DeKalb (48.0) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (49.4).
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.
Over time, the DeKalb value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Huntington

Current Value:

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Huntington

45.2
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Huntington has a value of 45.2 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 41.1 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 47.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (41.1), Huntington has a value of 45.2 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (37.7), Huntington has a value of 45.2 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Huntington (45.2) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (49.7).
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.
Over time, the Huntington value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Kosciusko

42.9
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Kosciusko has a value of 42.9 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 41.1 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 47.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (41.1), Kosciusko has a value of 42.9 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (37.7), Kosciusko has a value of 42.9 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Kosciusko (42.9) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (45.5).
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.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: LaGrange

36.1
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, LaGrange has a value of 36.1 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 41.1 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 47.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (41.1), LaGrange has a value of 36.1 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (37.7), LaGrange has a value of 36.1 which is lower and better.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, LaGrange (36.1) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (33.7).
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.
Over time, the LaGrange value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Noble

Current Value:

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Noble

38.0
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Noble has a value of 38.0 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 41.1 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 47.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (41.1), Noble has a value of 38.0 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (37.7), Noble has a value of 38.0 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Noble (38.0) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (36.0).
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.
Over time, the Noble value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wabash

Current Value:

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wabash

52.8
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wabash has a value of 52.8 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 41.1 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 47.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (41.1), Wabash has a value of 52.8 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (37.7), Wabash has a value of 52.8 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Wabash (52.8) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (51.1).
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.
Over time, the Wabash value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wells

Current Value:

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wells

41.7
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wells has a value of 41.7 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 41.1 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 47.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (41.1), Wells has a value of 41.7 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (37.7), Wells has a value of 41.7 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Wells (41.7) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (43.5).
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.
Over time, the Wells value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Whitley

Current Value:

Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate County: Whitley

44.1
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Whitley has a value of 44.1 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 41.1 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 47.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,628 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (41.1), Whitley has a value of 44.1 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(41.1)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (37.7), Whitley has a value of 44.1 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Whitley (44.1) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (45.1).
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.
Over time, the Whitley value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Cancer

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate

Value
Compared to:

Health / Cancer

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate

Value
Compared to:

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Adams

Current Value:

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Adams

62.8
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Adams has a value of 62.8 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 65.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 75.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (69.2), Adams has a value of 62.8 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (56.3), Adams has a value of 62.8 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Adams (62.8) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (59.6).
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.
Over time, the Adams value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen

Current Value:

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen

63.4
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 63.4 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 65.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 75.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (69.2), Allen has a value of 63.4 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (56.3), Allen has a value of 63.4 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (63.4) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (65.2).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: DeKalb

80.5
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, DeKalb has a value of 80.5 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 65.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 75.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (69.2), DeKalb has a value of 80.5 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (56.3), DeKalb has a value of 80.5 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, DeKalb (80.5) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (82.0).
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.
Over time, the DeKalb value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Huntington

Current Value:

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Huntington

66.5
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Huntington has a value of 66.5 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 65.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 75.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (69.2), Huntington has a value of 66.5 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (56.3), Huntington has a value of 66.5 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Huntington (66.5) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (66.1).
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.
Over time, the Huntington value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Kosciusko

71.6
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Kosciusko has a value of 71.6 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 65.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 75.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (69.2), Kosciusko has a value of 71.6 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (56.3), Kosciusko has a value of 71.6 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Kosciusko (71.6) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (72.0).
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.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: LaGrange

72.5
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, LaGrange has a value of 72.5 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 65.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 75.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (69.2), LaGrange has a value of 72.5 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (56.3), LaGrange has a value of 72.5 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, LaGrange (72.5) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (62.7).
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.
Over time, the LaGrange value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Noble

Current Value:

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Noble

79.1
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Noble has a value of 79.1 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 65.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 75.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (69.2), Noble has a value of 79.1 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (56.3), Noble has a value of 79.1 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Noble (79.1) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (78.5).
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.
Over time, the Noble value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wabash

Current Value:

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wabash

66.7
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wabash has a value of 66.7 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 65.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 75.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (69.2), Wabash has a value of 66.7 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (56.3), Wabash has a value of 66.7 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Wabash (66.7) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (62.6).
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.
Over time, the Wabash value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wells

Current Value:

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Wells

60.9
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wells has a value of 60.9 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 65.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 75.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (69.2), Wells has a value of 60.9 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (56.3), Wells has a value of 60.9 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Wells (60.9) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (68.8).
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.
Over time, the Wells value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Whitley

Current Value:

Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate County: Whitley

72.4
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Whitley has a value of 72.4 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 65.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 75.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,700 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (69.2), Whitley has a value of 72.4 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(69.2)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (56.3), Whitley has a value of 72.4 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(56.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Whitley (72.4) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (79.7).
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.
Over time, the Whitley value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Cancer

Mammography Screening: Medicare Population

Value
Compared to:

Health / Cancer

Mammography Screening: Medicare Population

Value
Compared to:

Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Allen

Current Value:

Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Allen

49.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 49.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50%  have a value higher than 45.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value lower than 40.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,123 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (49.0%), Allen has a value of 49.0%.
IN Value
(49.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (47.0%), Allen has a value of 49.0% which is higher and better.
US Value
(47.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (49.0%) is greater and better than the previously measured value (46.0%).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko

48.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Kosciusko has a value of 48.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50%  have a value higher than 45.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value lower than 40.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,123 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (49.0%), Kosciusko has a value of 48.0% which is lower and worse.
IN Value
(49.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (47.0%), Kosciusko has a value of 48.0% which is higher and better.
US Value
(47.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Kosciusko (48.0%) is greater and better than the previously measured value (46.0%).
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.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Noble

Current Value:

Mammography Screening: Medicare Population County: Noble

43.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Noble has a value of 43.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50%  have a value higher than 45.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value lower than 40.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,123 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (49.0%), Noble has a value of 43.0% which is lower and worse.
IN Value
(49.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (47.0%), Noble has a value of 43.0% which is lower and worse.
US Value
(47.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Noble (43.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (43.0%).
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.
Over time, the Noble value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Cancer

Oral Cavity and Pharynx Cancer Incidence Rate

Value
Compared to:

Health / Cancer

Oral Cavity and Pharynx Cancer Incidence Rate

Value
Compared to:

Oral Cavity and Pharynx Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen

Current Value:

Oral Cavity and Pharynx Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen

12.2
Cases per 100,000 population
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 12.2 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.1 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.2.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,862 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (12.7), Allen has a value of 12.2 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(12.7)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.0), Allen has a value of 12.2 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(12.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (12.2) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (12.3).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Cancer

Prostate Cancer Incidence Rate

Value
Compared to:

Health / Cancer

Prostate Cancer Incidence Rate

Value
Compared to:

Prostate Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen

Current Value:

Prostate Cancer Incidence Rate County: Allen

97.6
Cases per 100,000 males
(2015-2019)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 97.6 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 106.8 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 124.4.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,712 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (99.9), Allen has a value of 97.6 which is lower and better.
IN Value
(99.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (109.9), Allen has a value of 97.6 which is lower and better.
US Value
(109.9)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (97.6) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (97.7).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Children's Health

Health / Children's Health

Health / Children's Health

Child Mortality Rate: Under 20

Value
Compared to:

Health / Children's Health

Child Mortality Rate: Under 20

Value
Compared to:

Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Allen

Current Value:

Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Allen

67.1
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 67.1 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 59.3 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 76.0.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,859 U.S. counties and county equivalents. Counties in Idaho, Kentucky, and Oklahoma are excluded due to incomparable data between each other and the rest of the country.
Compared to the IN Value (61.9), Allen has a value of 67.1 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(61.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (50.6), Allen has a value of 67.1 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Noble

Current Value:

Child Mortality Rate: Under 20 County: Noble

79.0
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Noble has a value of 79.0 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 58.7 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 74.8.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,038 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (61.9), Noble has a value of 79.0 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(61.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (50.6), Noble has a value of 79.0 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Diabetes

Health / Diabetes

Health / Diabetes

Adults 20+ with Diabetes

Value
Compared to:

Health / Diabetes

Adults 20+ with Diabetes

Value
Compared to:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Adams

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Adams

7.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Adams has a value of 7.7% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Adams (7.7%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (7.7%).
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.
Over time, the Adams value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Allen

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Allen

10.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 10.1% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (10.1%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (9.0%).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: DeKalb

8.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, DeKalb has a value of 8.5% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, DeKalb (8.5%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (8.6%).
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.
Over time, the DeKalb value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Huntington

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Huntington

10.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Huntington has a value of 10.1% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Huntington (10.1%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (10.5%).
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.
Over time, the Huntington value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Kosciusko

8.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Kosciusko has a value of 8.6% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Kosciusko (8.6%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (9.9%).
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.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: LaGrange

8.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, LaGrange has a value of 8.8% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, LaGrange (8.8%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (8.2%).
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.
Over time, the LaGrange value is staying the same.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Noble

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Noble

9.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Noble has a value of 9.1% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Noble (9.1%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (8.8%).
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.
Over time, the Noble value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Wabash

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Wabash

9.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wabash has a value of 9.2% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Wabash (9.2%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (9.6%).
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.
Over time, the Wabash value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Wells

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Wells

8.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wells has a value of 8.6% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Wells (8.6%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (7.5%).
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.
Over time, the Wells value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Whitley

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Whitley

8.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Whitley has a value of 8.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Whitley (8.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (7.8%).
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.
Over time, the Whitley value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Diabetes

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes

Value
Compared to:

Health / Diabetes

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes

Value
Compared to:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Allen

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Allen

34.6
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 34.6 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 26.2 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 34.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,937 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.9), Allen has a value of 34.6 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(26.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (22.6), Allen has a value of 34.6 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(22.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (34.6) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (29.4).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Kosciusko

39.0
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Kosciusko has a value of 39.0 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 26.2 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 34.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,937 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.9), Kosciusko has a value of 39.0 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(26.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (22.6), Kosciusko has a value of 39.0 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(22.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Kosciusko (39.0) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (35.2).
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.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Noble

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Noble

31.4
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Noble has a value of 31.4 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 26.2 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 34.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,937 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.9), Noble has a value of 31.4 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(26.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (22.6), Noble has a value of 31.4 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(22.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Noble (31.4) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (28.5).
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.
Over time, the Noble value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Wabash

Current Value:

Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes County: Wabash

52.8
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wabash has a value of 52.8 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 26.2 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 34.6.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,937 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.9), Wabash has a value of 52.8 which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(26.9)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (22.6), Wabash has a value of 52.8 which is higher and worse.
US Value
(22.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Wabash (52.8) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (42.7).
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.
Over time, the Wabash value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Diabetes

Diabetes: Medicare Population

Value
Compared to:

Health / Diabetes

Diabetes: Medicare Population

Value
Compared to:

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Adams

Current Value:

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Adams

27.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Adams has a value of 27.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 28.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.0%), Adams has a value of 27.0% which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (24.0%), Adams has a value of 27.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Adams (27.0%) is less and better than the previously measured value (28.0%).
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.
Over time, the Adams value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Allen

Current Value:

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Allen

24.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Allen has a value of 24.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 28.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.0%), Allen has a value of 24.0% which is lower and better.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (24.0%), Allen has a value of 24.0%.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (24.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (24.0%).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: DeKalb

25.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, DeKalb has a value of 25.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 28.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.0%), DeKalb has a value of 25.0% which is lower and better.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (24.0%), DeKalb has a value of 25.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, DeKalb (25.0%) is less and better than the previously measured value (26.0%).
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.
Over time, the DeKalb value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Huntington

Current Value:

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Huntington

27.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Huntington has a value of 27.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 28.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.0%), Huntington has a value of 27.0% which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (24.0%), Huntington has a value of 27.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Huntington (27.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (27.0%).
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.
Over time, the Huntington value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Kosciusko

25.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Kosciusko has a value of 25.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 28.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.0%), Kosciusko has a value of 25.0% which is lower and better.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (24.0%), Kosciusko has a value of 25.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Kosciusko (25.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (25.0%).
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.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: LaGrange

24.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, LaGrange has a value of 24.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 28.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.0%), LaGrange has a value of 24.0% which is lower and better.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (24.0%), LaGrange has a value of 24.0%.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, LaGrange (24.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (24.0%).
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.
Over time, the LaGrange value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Noble

Current Value:

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Noble

26.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Noble has a value of 26.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 28.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.0%), Noble has a value of 26.0%.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (24.0%), Noble has a value of 26.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Noble (26.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (26.0%).
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.
Over time, the Noble value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Wabash

Current Value:

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Wabash

29.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wabash has a value of 29.0% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 28.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.0%), Wabash has a value of 29.0% which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (24.0%), Wabash has a value of 29.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Wabash (29.0%) is greater and worse than the previously measured value (28.0%).
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.
Over time, the Wabash value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Wells

Current Value:

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Wells

27.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Wells has a value of 27.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 28.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.0%), Wells has a value of 27.0% which is higher and worse.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (24.0%), Wells has a value of 27.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Wells (27.0%) is less and better than the previously measured value (28.0%).
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.
Over time, the Wells value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Whitley

Current Value:

Diabetes: Medicare Population County: Whitley

26.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Counties, Whitley has a value of 26.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 25.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 28.0%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the IN Value (26.0%), Whitley has a value of 26.0%.
IN Value
(26.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (24.0%), Whitley has a value of 26.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Whitley (26.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (26.0%).
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.
Over time, the Whitley value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Disabilities

Health / Disabilities

Health / Disabilities

Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Health / Disabilities

Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty County: Allen

Current Value:

Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty County: Allen

4.9%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (6.0%), Allen has a value of 4.9%.
IN Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (6.0%), Allen has a value of 4.9%.
US Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Allen (4.9%) is less  than the previously measured value (6.8%).
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.
Over time, the Allen value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty County: Kosciusko

4.3%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (6.0%), Kosciusko has a value of 4.3%.
IN Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (6.0%), Kosciusko has a value of 4.3%.
US Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Kosciusko (4.3%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (5.8%).
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.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

Current Value:

Adults with an Independent Living Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

5.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the Allen, IN County Value (4.9%), Fort Wayne has a value of 5.4%.
Allen, IN County Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
Compared to the IN Value (6.0%), Fort Wayne has a value of 5.4%.
IN Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (6.0%), Fort Wayne has a value of 5.4%.
US Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Compared to the prior value, Fort Wayne (5.4%) is less  than the previously measured value (8.1%).
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.
Over time, the Fort Wayne value is staying the same.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Disabilities

Children with a Disability

Value
Compared to:

Health / Disabilities

Children with a Disability

Value
Compared to:

Children with a Disability County: Adams

Current Value:

Children with a Disability County: Adams

3.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (4.9%), Adams has a value of 3.8%.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (4.5%), Adams has a value of 3.8%.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Adams value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Children with a Disability County: Allen

Current Value:

Children with a Disability County: Allen

4.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (4.9%), Allen has a value of 4.7%.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (4.5%), Allen has a value of 4.7%.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Allen value is staying the same.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Children with a Disability County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Children with a Disability County: DeKalb

6.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (4.9%), DeKalb has a value of 6.4%.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (4.5%), DeKalb has a value of 6.4%.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the DeKalb value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Children with a Disability County: Huntington

Current Value:

Children with a Disability County: Huntington

3.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (4.9%), Huntington has a value of 3.8%.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (4.5%), Huntington has a value of 3.8%.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Huntington value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Children with a Disability County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Children with a Disability County: Kosciusko

6.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (4.9%), Kosciusko has a value of 6.8%.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (4.5%), Kosciusko has a value of 6.8%.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Children with a Disability County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Children with a Disability County: LaGrange

1.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (4.9%), LaGrange has a value of 1.3%.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (4.5%), LaGrange has a value of 1.3%.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the LaGrange value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Children with a Disability County: Noble

Current Value:

Children with a Disability County: Noble

4.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (4.9%), Noble has a value of 4.4%.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (4.5%), Noble has a value of 4.4%.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Noble value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Children with a Disability County: Wabash

Current Value:

Children with a Disability County: Wabash

4.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (4.9%), Wabash has a value of 4.2%.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (4.5%), Wabash has a value of 4.2%.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wabash value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Children with a Disability County: Wells

Current Value:

Children with a Disability County: Wells

3.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (4.9%), Wells has a value of 3.2%.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (4.5%), Wells has a value of 3.2%.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wells value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Children with a Disability County: Whitley

Current Value:

Children with a Disability County: Whitley

4.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (4.9%), Whitley has a value of 4.6%.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (4.5%), Whitley has a value of 4.6%.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Whitley value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Children with a Disability Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

Current Value:

Children with a Disability Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

5.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the Allen, IN County Value (4.7%), Fort Wayne has a value of 5.3%.
Allen, IN County Value
(4.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
Compared to the IN Value (4.9%), Fort Wayne has a value of 5.3%.
IN Value
(4.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (4.5%), Fort Wayne has a value of 5.3%.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Fort Wayne value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Disabilities

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Health / Disabilities

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Adams

Current Value:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Adams

4.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (5.7%), Adams has a value of 4.9%.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (5.3%), Adams has a value of 4.9%.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Adams value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Allen

Current Value:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Allen

5.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (5.7%), Allen has a value of 5.5%.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (5.3%), Allen has a value of 5.5%.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: DeKalb

5.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (5.7%), DeKalb has a value of 5.7%.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (5.3%), DeKalb has a value of 5.7%.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the DeKalb value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Huntington

Current Value:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Huntington

5.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (5.7%), Huntington has a value of 5.3%.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (5.3%), Huntington has a value of 5.3%.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Huntington value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Kosciusko

5.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (5.7%), Kosciusko has a value of 5.9%.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (5.3%), Kosciusko has a value of 5.9%.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: LaGrange

4.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (5.7%), LaGrange has a value of 4.5%.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (5.3%), LaGrange has a value of 4.5%.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the LaGrange value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Noble

Current Value:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Noble

5.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (5.7%), Noble has a value of 5.7%.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (5.3%), Noble has a value of 5.7%.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Noble value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Wabash

Current Value:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Wabash

5.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (5.7%), Wabash has a value of 5.2%.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (5.3%), Wabash has a value of 5.2%.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wabash value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Wells

Current Value:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Wells

4.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (5.7%), Wells has a value of 4.5%.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (5.3%), Wells has a value of 4.5%.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wells value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Whitley

Current Value:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty County: Whitley

4.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (5.7%), Whitley has a value of 4.9%.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (5.3%), Whitley has a value of 4.9%.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Whitley value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

Current Value:

Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

6.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the Allen, IN County Value (5.5%), Fort Wayne has a value of 6.4%.
Allen, IN County Value
(5.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
Compared to the IN Value (5.7%), Fort Wayne has a value of 6.4%.
IN Value
(5.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (5.3%), Fort Wayne has a value of 6.4%.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Fort Wayne value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Disabilities

Persons with a Disability

Value
Compared to:

Health / Disabilities

Persons with a Disability

Value
Compared to:

Persons with a Disability County: Adams

Current Value:

Persons with a Disability County: Adams

11.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (13.7%), Adams has a value of 11.3%.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.9%), Adams has a value of 11.3%.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Adams value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Disability County: Allen

Current Value:

Persons with a Disability County: Allen

12.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (13.7%), Allen has a value of 12.3%.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.9%), Allen has a value of 12.3%.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Disability County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Persons with a Disability County: DeKalb

13.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (13.7%), DeKalb has a value of 13.1%.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.9%), DeKalb has a value of 13.1%.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the DeKalb value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Disability County: Huntington

Current Value:

Persons with a Disability County: Huntington

14.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (13.7%), Huntington has a value of 14.4%.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.9%), Huntington has a value of 14.4%.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Huntington value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Disability County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Persons with a Disability County: Kosciusko

13.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (13.7%), Kosciusko has a value of 13.6%.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.9%), Kosciusko has a value of 13.6%.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Disability County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Persons with a Disability County: LaGrange

10.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (13.7%), LaGrange has a value of 10.9%.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.9%), LaGrange has a value of 10.9%.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the LaGrange value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Disability County: Noble

Current Value:

Persons with a Disability County: Noble

13.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (13.7%), Noble has a value of 13.9%.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.9%), Noble has a value of 13.9%.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Noble value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Disability County: Wabash

Current Value:

Persons with a Disability County: Wabash

15.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (13.7%), Wabash has a value of 15.2%.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.9%), Wabash has a value of 15.2%.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wabash value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Disability County: Wells

Current Value:

Persons with a Disability County: Wells

12.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (13.7%), Wells has a value of 12.5%.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.9%), Wells has a value of 12.5%.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wells value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Disability County: Whitley

Current Value:

Persons with a Disability County: Whitley

13.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (13.7%), Whitley has a value of 13.7%.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.9%), Whitley has a value of 13.7%.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Whitley value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Disability Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

Current Value:

Persons with a Disability Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

13.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the Allen, IN County Value (12.3%), Fort Wayne has a value of 13.7%.
Allen, IN County Value
(12.3%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
Compared to the IN Value (13.7%), Fort Wayne has a value of 13.7%.
IN Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (12.9%), Fort Wayne has a value of 13.7%.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Fort Wayne value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Disabilities

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Health / Disabilities

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Adams

Current Value:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Adams

3.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (3.8%), Adams has a value of 3.6%.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (3.6%), Adams has a value of 3.6%.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Adams value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Allen

Current Value:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Allen

3.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (3.8%), Allen has a value of 3.2%.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (3.6%), Allen has a value of 3.2%.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: DeKalb

4.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (3.8%), DeKalb has a value of 4.2%.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (3.6%), DeKalb has a value of 4.2%.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the DeKalb value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Huntington

Current Value:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Huntington

4.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (3.8%), Huntington has a value of 4.0%.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (3.6%), Huntington has a value of 4.0%.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Huntington value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Kosciusko

4.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (3.8%), Kosciusko has a value of 4.2%.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (3.6%), Kosciusko has a value of 4.2%.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: LaGrange

4.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (3.8%), LaGrange has a value of 4.3%.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (3.6%), LaGrange has a value of 4.3%.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the LaGrange value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Noble

Current Value:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Noble

3.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (3.8%), Noble has a value of 3.8%.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (3.6%), Noble has a value of 3.8%.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Noble value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Wabash

Current Value:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Wabash

4.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (3.8%), Wabash has a value of 4.6%.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (3.6%), Wabash has a value of 4.6%.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wabash value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Wells

Current Value:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Wells

3.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (3.8%), Wells has a value of 3.7%.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (3.6%), Wells has a value of 3.7%.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wells value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Whitley

Current Value:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty County: Whitley

5.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (3.8%), Whitley has a value of 5.0%.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (3.6%), Whitley has a value of 5.0%.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Whitley value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

Current Value:

Persons with a Hearing Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

3.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the Allen, IN County Value (3.2%), Fort Wayne has a value of 3.4%.
Allen, IN County Value
(3.2%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
Compared to the IN Value (3.8%), Fort Wayne has a value of 3.4%.
IN Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (3.6%), Fort Wayne has a value of 3.4%.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Fort Wayne value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Disabilities

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Health / Disabilities

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Adams

Current Value:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Adams

2.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Adams has a value of 2.7%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.6%), Adams has a value of 2.7%.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Adams value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Allen

Current Value:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Allen

2.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Allen has a value of 2.3%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.6%), Allen has a value of 2.3%.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: DeKalb

2.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), DeKalb has a value of 2.4%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.6%), DeKalb has a value of 2.4%.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the DeKalb value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Huntington

Current Value:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Huntington

2.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Huntington has a value of 2.8%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.6%), Huntington has a value of 2.8%.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Huntington value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Kosciusko

2.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Kosciusko has a value of 2.1%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.6%), Kosciusko has a value of 2.1%.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: LaGrange

1.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), LaGrange has a value of 1.6%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.6%), LaGrange has a value of 1.6%.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the LaGrange value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Noble

Current Value:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Noble

2.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Noble has a value of 2.3%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.6%), Noble has a value of 2.3%.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Noble value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Wabash

Current Value:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Wabash

2.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Wabash has a value of 2.5%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.6%), Wabash has a value of 2.5%.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wabash value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Wells

Current Value:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Wells

1.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Wells has a value of 1.9%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.6%), Wells has a value of 1.9%.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wells value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Whitley

Current Value:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty County: Whitley

1.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Whitley has a value of 1.8%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.6%), Whitley has a value of 1.8%.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Whitley value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

Current Value:

Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

2.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the Allen, IN County Value (2.3%), Fort Wayne has a value of 2.6%.
Allen, IN County Value
(2.3%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Fort Wayne has a value of 2.6%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.6%), Fort Wayne has a value of 2.6%.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Fort Wayne value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Disabilities

Persons with a Vision Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Health / Disabilities

Persons with a Vision Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Adams

Current Value:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Adams

2.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Adams has a value of 2.0%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.4%), Adams has a value of 2.0%.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Adams value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Allen

Current Value:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Allen

1.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Allen has a value of 1.9%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.4%), Allen has a value of 1.9%.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Allen value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: DeKalb

2.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), DeKalb has a value of 2.8%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.4%), DeKalb has a value of 2.8%.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the DeKalb value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Huntington

Current Value:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Huntington

3.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Huntington has a value of 3.2%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.4%), Huntington has a value of 3.2%.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Huntington value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Kosciusko

Current Value:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Kosciusko

2.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Kosciusko has a value of 2.4%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.4%), Kosciusko has a value of 2.4%.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Kosciusko value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: LaGrange

Current Value:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: LaGrange

1.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), LaGrange has a value of 1.8%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.4%), LaGrange has a value of 1.8%.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the LaGrange value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Noble

Current Value:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Noble

2.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Noble has a value of 2.2%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.4%), Noble has a value of 2.2%.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Noble value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Wabash

Current Value:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Wabash

2.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Wabash has a value of 2.8%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.4%), Wabash has a value of 2.8%.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wabash value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Wells

Current Value:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Wells

2.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Wells has a value of 2.1%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.4%), Wells has a value of 2.1%.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Wells value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Whitley

Current Value:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty County: Whitley

3.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Whitley has a value of 3.5%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.4%), Whitley has a value of 3.5%.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Whitley value is increasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with a Vision Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

Current Value:

Persons with a Vision Difficulty Census Place (City): Fort Wayne

2.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the Allen, IN County Value (1.9%), Fort Wayne has a value of 2.2%.
Allen, IN County Value
(1.9%)
The regional value is compared to the Allen County value.
Compared to the IN Value (2.5%), Fort Wayne has a value of 2.2%.
IN Value
(2.5%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (2.4%), Fort Wayne has a value of 2.2%.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Fort Wayne value is increasing significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Health / Disabilities

Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Health / Disabilities

Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty

Value
Compared to:

Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Adams

Current Value:

Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Adams

6.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (7.1%), Adams has a value of 6.1%.
IN Value
(7.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (6.7%), Adams has a value of 6.1%.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Adams value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Allen

Current Value:

Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Allen

6.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (7.1%), Allen has a value of 6.5%.
IN Value
(7.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (6.7%), Allen has a value of 6.5%.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Allen value is decreasing, not significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: DeKalb

Current Value:

Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: DeKalb

6.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (7.1%), DeKalb has a value of 6.3%.
IN Value
(7.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (6.7%), DeKalb has a value of 6.3%.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the DeKalb value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV

Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Huntington

Current Value:

Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty County: Huntington

7.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Compared to the IN Value (7.1%), Huntington has a value of 7.6%.
IN Value
(7.1%)
The regional value is compared to the Indiana State value.
Compared to the US Value (6.7%), Huntington has a value of 7.6%.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Over time, the Huntington value is decreasing, significantly.
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.
  • Download JPEG
  • Download PDF
  • Download CSV