placestats

Harding County, NM

A county, and one of the 3,222 county-level areas the Census Bureau reports for the United States.

Population748
Density0.1people per km² of land
Median household income$41,250
Land area5505km²

Its peers

These are the 50 areas most like Harding County in population density and median household income (the middle household income). Both are measured in percentage terms and put on the same scale, so neither one counts for more. The closest eight: Culberson County, TX, Edwards County, TX, Hudspeth County, TX, Terrell County, TX, Catron County, NM, Prairie County, MT, Jackson County, CO, Kusilvak Census Area, AK. The peer scores below compare this county with all 50.

Least like its peers

The measures where Harding Countyis furthest from the average of its peers. The gap is shown in “sd” (standard deviations), which means typical gaps between peers: −2 sd is about two typical gaps below the peer average. A national ranking would hide these numbers behind the county’s income.

MeasureValueAmong peersNationallyvs peers
Other religion adherents70.5100th pct by value100th pct by value +4.3 sd
Gini index of income inequality0.710th pct0th pct +4.2 sd
Religious adherents156100th pct by value100th pct by value +3.5 sd
Catholic adherents75.398th pct by value100th pct by value +3.4 sd
Congregations per 10,000 people107100th pct by value100th pct by value +3.3 sd
Returns claiming the earned income credit0%12th pct by value1st pct by value -1.6 sd

How it has changed

This chart covers 2010–2024. A few measures were published only once — the school, moving-up-the-income-ladder (mobility) and social-ties (social capital) ones. They show as a single point that says so. Everything else is drawn over the years its publisher covers. Each value sits at the year it describes, not the year it came out.

Loading…

Every measure

Rates and medians come first, then counts. Counts have no peer score. A county’s population cannot be high or low “for its peers” when the peers were picked partly by density. Density and median household income have no peer score either, since they are what the peers were picked by.

Adult income rank of children raised poor here0.5529095+1.1Opportunity Atlas
Adults under 65 without health insurance17.9%328+0.3CDC PLACES
Aggregate travel time to work uncertain6,185 min———Census ACS 5-year
All natural teeth lost, age 65 and over18.3%4031-0.0CDC PLACES
Any disability35.2%3830+0.1CDC PLACES
Arthritis23.2%6868-0.5CDC PLACES
Binge drinking15.1%8886-1.1CDC PLACES
Black Protestant adherents090·45·-0.3
Business closing rate026·2·-1.4Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments11———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments closed0———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments opened0———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business opening rate026·2·-1.5Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Cancer other than skin cancer6.1%7488-0.7CDC PLACES
Catholic adherents75.398·100·+3.4
Child poverty rate, ages 0-17 uncertain26.8%4416+0.0Census SAIPE
Children in the mobility cohort111———Opportunity Atlas
Cholesterol screening79.9%629+0.1CDC PLACES
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease6.9%5046-0.3CDC PLACES
Cognitive disability17.9%4830-0.0CDC PLACES
Colorectal cancer screening52.8%5814+0.4CDC PLACES
Congregations per 10,000 people107100·100·+3.3
Coronary heart disease6.6%3019+0.1CDC PLACES
Current asthma10%7278-0.7CDC PLACES
Current cigarette smoking15.6%6256-0.3CDC PLACES
Dental visit in the past year57.9%7044+0.5CDC PLACES
Depression24.3%4446+0.2CDC PLACES
Diagnosed diabetes12.4%3425+0.2CDC PLACES
Disability-free score-0.75738·20·-0.1
Economy score0.32144·23·-0.0
Effective property tax rate uncertain0.37913·5·-0.9Census ACS 5-year
Employed323———BLS LAUS
Evangelical Protestant adherents4.2614·5·-0.7
Fair or poor self-rated health25.6%3215+0.3CDC PLACES
Fine particulate matter4.96896-0.5County Health Rankings
Flu vaccination among Medicare enrollees0.24%467-0.1County Health Rankings
Food insecurity24.4%2413+0.5CDC PLACES
Frequent mental distress18%7061-0.5CDC PLACES
Frequent physical distress15.8%3616+0.2CDC PLACES
Gini index of income inequality0.7100+4.2Census ACS 5-year
Gross domestic product$53,487k———BEA Regional Accounts
Health score-0.98622·6·-0.6
Hearing disability7.9%4615-0.2CDC PLACES
High blood pressure32.5%3652+0.1CDC PLACES
High cholesterol30.5%3272+0.1CDC PLACES
Homeownership rate78.4%80·74·+0.6Census ACS 5-year
Housing insecurity19.1%2813+0.6CDC PLACES
Housing units489———Census ACS 5-year
Independent-living disability10.3%3423+0.1CDC PLACES
Labour force333———BLS LAUS
Lack of reliable transportation12.5%2813+0.3CDC PLACES
Lacking social and emotional support24.8%3537+0.3CDC PLACES
Loneliness34.6%2841+0.7CDC PLACES
Mainline Protestant adherents6.2458·49·-0.1
Mammography in the past two years64.2%163-0.9CDC PLACES
Material security score-1.6913·3·-1.1
Mean adjusted gross income per return$65,6107641+0.9IRS Statistics of Income
Mean travel time to work uncertain24.4 min1949+0.6Census ACS 5-year
Median age43.1 years40·65·-0.3Census ACS 5-year
Median home value uncertain$86,50024·4·-0.9Census ACS 5-year
Median household income$41,250—6—Census ACS 5-year
Median household income (model-based)$47,606409-0.4Census SAIPE
Median property tax bill3282·2·-1.5Census ACS 5-year
Membership organisations0565-0.7County Health Rankings
Mobility disability15.2%3828+0.0CDC PLACES
Net business formation rate070·35·+0.1Census Business Dynamics Statistics
No leisure-time physical activity27.7%4440-0.0CDC PLACES
Obesity36.5%5265-0.0CDC PLACES
Occupied housing units282———Census ACS 5-year
Orthodox Christian adherents096·78·-0.1
Other religion adherents70.5100·100·+4.3
Owner-occupied housing units221———Census ACS 5-year
People covered by a tax return530———IRS Statistics of Income
People per tax return234·25·-0.6IRS Statistics of Income
People who did not move477———IRS county migration flows
Per capita personal income$50,7503237-0.5BEA Regional Accounts
Personal income$32,632k———BEA Regional Accounts
Population643———BEA Regional Accounts
Population624———County Health Rankings
Population aged 15 and over631———Census ACS 5-year
Population aged 18 and over540———CDC PLACES
Population aged 25 and over508———Census ACS 5-year
Population aged 65 and over208———Census ACS 5-year
Population below the poverty line uncertain140———Census ACS 5-year
Population below the poverty line94———Census SAIPE
Population for whom poverty status is determined748———Census ACS 5-year
Population for whom poverty status is determined623———Census SAIPE
Population in the same house one year ago683———Census ACS 5-year
Population with a bachelor's degree or higher uncertain154———Census ACS 5-year
Population, decennial census657———
Poverty rate uncertain18.7%5522-0.2Census ACS 5-year
Poverty rate (model-based)15.1%6438-0.5Census SAIPE
Presidential votes cast, 2000593———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2004644———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2008626———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2012601———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2016527———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2020505———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2024425———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Private job growth-12.38·1·-0.9BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Private jobs57———BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Received food stamps21.7%76·89·+0.7CDC PLACES
Religious adherents156100·100·+3.5
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200063.131·64·-0.3MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200459.522·44·-0.6MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200857.931·50·-0.3MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 201255.729·34·-0.6MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 201666.631·42·-0.3MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 202064.129·38·-0.5MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 202469.929·47·-0.3MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican swing, 2000 to 20246.7859·40·+0.1MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Returns claiming charitable contributions0%64·5·-0.7IRS Statistics of Income
Returns claiming the earned income credit0%12·1·-1.6IRS Statistics of Income
Returns reporting capital gains20.7%60·77·+0.2IRS Statistics of Income
Returns reporting unemployment compensation0%72·9·-0.5IRS Statistics of Income
Routine checkup in the past year66%14·2·-1.4CDC PLACES
Self-care disability5.1%2812+0.3CDC PLACES
Share aged 65 and over27.8%54·94·+0.3Census ACS 5-year
Share American Indian or Alaska Native, not Hispanic0%—24·—Census ACS 5-year
Share Asian, not Hispanic0%93·14·-0.3Census ACS 5-year
Share Hispanic or Latino, any race uncertain40.6%60·92·+0.3Census ACS 5-year
Share in the same house a year ago91.3%66·86·+0.4Census ACS 5-year
Share Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, not Hispanic0%100·83·—Census ACS 5-year
Share never married uncertain31.9%65·70·+0.3Census ACS 5-year
Share now married uncertain48.8%46·29·-0.1Census ACS 5-year
Share of births to unmarried women0%73·11·-0.6Census ACS 5-year
Share White, not Hispanic46.3%25·12·-0.8Census ACS 5-year
Share widowed uncertain9.67%63·93·+0.1Census ACS 5-year
Share with a bachelor's degree or higher uncertain30.3%9478+1.1Census ACS 5-year
Sleeping less than 7 hours34.8%5671-0.4CDC PLACES
Stroke3.6%3021+0.0CDC PLACES
Taking blood pressure medication54.5%60·16·-0.1CDC PLACES
Tax returns filed290———IRS Statistics of Income
Tests taken580———Stanford Education Data Archive
Threat of utility shut-off13.6%2812+0.5CDC PLACES
Total population748———Census ACS 5-year
Unemployed10———BLS LAUS
Unemployment rate3%6668-0.4BLS LAUS
Vacancy rate42.3%88·97·+1.2Census ACS 5-year
Vacant housing units207———Census ACS 5-year
Vision disability7.7%289+0.3CDC PLACES
Women aged 15 to 50 uncertain154———Census ACS 5-year
Workers aged 16 and over who commute uncertain253———Census ACS 5-year

15of these values are marked uncertain. Either the published margin of error (the likely range around a survey estimate) is wide compared with the estimate, or the value was split across Connecticut’s 2022 boundary change. A split value is shared out between old and new areas, not measured directly.

A percentile is the share of the comparison group at or below this county’s value. A peer score needs at least 20 peers with published data. Where fewer report, the cell is left blank instead of being worked out from a handful.