placestats

Loup County, NE

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

Population564
Density0.4people per km² of land
Median household income$60,156
Land area1459km²

Its peers

These are the 50 areas most like Loup 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: Lake County, OR, Haakon County, SD, Prince of Wales-Hyder Census Area, AK, Garfield County, UT, Daggett County, UT, Hayes County, NE, Keya Paha County, NE, Daniels County, MT. The peer scores below compare this county with all 50.

Least like its peers

The measures where Loup 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
Net business formation rate-27.30th pct by value0th pct by value -3.4 sd
Private job growth-28.62nd pct by value0th pct by value -3.1 sd
Business closing rate27.398th pct by value100th pct by value +2.5 sd
Cognitive disability12%98th pct97th pct -2.0 sd
Depression18%98th pct97th pct -2.0 sd
Child poverty rate, ages 0-1728.2%4th pct12th pct +1.9 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 here0.62992100+1.3Opportunity Atlas
Adults under 65 without health insurance7.6%9688-1.2CDC PLACES
Aggregate travel time to work uncertain6,845 min———Census ACS 5-year
All natural teeth lost, age 65 and over13.7%3461+0.0CDC PLACES
Any disability24.9%9894-1.8CDC PLACES
Arthritis21.5%9288-1.5CDC PLACES
Binge drinking23.6%01+1.4CDC PLACES
Black Protestant adherents096·45·-0.1
Business closing rate27.398·100·+2.5Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments10———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments closed3———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments opened0———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business opening rate022·2·-1.3Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Cancer other than skin cancer7.4%3619+0.4CDC PLACES
Catholic adherents020·6·-1.0
Child poverty rate, ages 0-17 uncertain28.2%412+1.9Census SAIPE
Children in the mobility cohort159———Opportunity Atlas
Cholesterol screening82.1%7236+0.6CDC PLACES
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease5.4%9085-1.3CDC PLACES
Cognitive disability12%9897-2.0CDC PLACES
Colorectal cancer screening55%5428+0.1CDC PLACES
Congregations per 10,000 people16.50·34·-1.6
Coronary heart disease5.3%7878-0.9CDC PLACES
Current asthma9.1%9897-1.7CDC PLACES
Current cigarette smoking13.6%8080-0.7CDC PLACES
Dental visit in the past year64.5%7680+0.8CDC PLACES
Departures per 100 people staying7.1793·82·+1.3IRS county migration flows
Depression18%9897-2.0CDC PLACES
Diagnosed diabetes8.9%6886-0.6CDC PLACES
Disability-free score1.0496·92·+1.5
Economy score1.1574·68·+0.5
Employed286———BLS LAUS
Evangelical Protestant adherents3.4612·4·-0.7
Fair or poor self-rated health14.1%9696-1.6CDC PLACES
Fine particulate matter5.45292-0.3County Health Rankings
Flu vaccination among Medicare enrollees0.31%7517+0.5County Health Rankings
Food insecurity10.6%9794-1.1CDC PLACES
Frequent mental distress14.9%9897-1.7CDC PLACES
Frequent physical distress10.8%9695-1.6CDC PLACES
Gini index of income inequality0.4067289-0.8Census ACS 5-year
Gross domestic product$47,344k———BEA Regional Accounts
Health score-0.27142·34·+0.0
Hearing disability6.7%8457-0.9CDC PLACES
High blood pressure29.3%7483-0.5CDC PLACES
High cholesterol28%8496-0.9CDC PLACES
Homeownership rate66.3%12·18·-1.3Census ACS 5-year
Housing insecurity8.8%9796-1.2CDC PLACES
Housing units429———Census ACS 5-year
Independent-living disability6.5%9694-1.6CDC PLACES
Jail admission rate74411·8·-0.9
Jail population rate10016·4·-0.5
Labour force297———BLS LAUS
Lack of reliable transportation6.2%9495-1.1CDC PLACES
Lacking social and emotional support19.8%9496-1.2CDC PLACES
Loneliness29.1%10098-1.4CDC PLACES
Mainline Protestant adherents08·1·-1.2
Mammography in the past two years71.2%4030-0.0CDC PLACES
Material security score0.56372·69·+0.6
Mean income of departing households$53,05065·52·-0.1IRS county migration flows
Mean travel time to work uncertain23.8 min1254+1.0Census ACS 5-year
Median age47.1 years56·86·+0.1Census ACS 5-year
Median gross rent uncertain$65027·10·-0.7Census ACS 5-year
Median household income uncertain$60,156—41—Census ACS 5-year
Median household income (model-based)$61,6086847+0.2Census SAIPE
Median property tax bill uncertain96525·24·-0.7Census ACS 5-year
Membership organisations0485-0.8County Health Rankings
Mobility disability10.1%9691-1.3CDC PLACES
Net business formation rate-27.30·0·-3.4Census Business Dynamics Statistics
No leisure-time physical activity23.9%4671+0.1CDC PLACES
Obesity36.7%3863+0.3CDC PLACES
Occupied housing units249———Census ACS 5-year
Orthodox Christian adherents0100·78·—
Other religion adherents052·11·-0.4
Owner-occupied housing units165———Census ACS 5-year
People covered by a tax return570———IRS Statistics of Income
People per tax return234·48·-0.4IRS Statistics of Income
People who did not move460———IRS county migration flows
Per capita income$32,6762844-0.5Census ACS 5-year
Per capita personal income$77,3137091+0.5BEA Regional Accounts
Personal income$45,383k———BEA Regional Accounts
Population587———BEA Regional Accounts
Population592———County Health Rankings
Population aged 15 and over479———Census ACS 5-year
Population aged 18 and over479———CDC PLACES
Population aged 25 and over420———Census ACS 5-year
Population aged 65 and over152———Census ACS 5-year
Population below the poverty line uncertain98———Census SAIPE
Population for whom poverty status is determined564———Census ACS 5-year
Population for whom poverty status is determined590———Census SAIPE
Population in the same house one year ago506———Census ACS 5-year
Population with a bachelor's degree or higher uncertain109———Census ACS 5-year
Population, decennial census607———
Poverty rate (model-based) uncertain16.6%1429+1.0Census SAIPE
Presidential votes cast, 2000378———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2004386———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2008393———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2012358———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2016385———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2020454———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2024428———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Private job growth-28.62·0·-3.1BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Private jobs35———BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Received food stamps7.8%18·11·-0.8CDC PLACES
Religious adherents3.460·0·-1.8
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200077.227·93·-0.2MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200482.273·96·+0.6MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200877.863·93·+0.4MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 201282.463·94·+0.4MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 201687.154·95·+0.3MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 202083.140·88·-0.0MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 202482.933·84·-0.1MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican swing, 2000 to 20245.7346·36·-0.0MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Returns claiming charitable contributions0%56·5·-0.8IRS Statistics of Income
Returns claiming the earned income credit0%26·1·-1.4IRS Statistics of Income
Returns reporting capital gains33.3%72·98·+0.8IRS Statistics of Income
Returns reporting unemployment compensation0%68·9·-0.6IRS Statistics of Income
Routine checkup in the past year73.4%90·32·+1.1CDC PLACES
Self-care disability2.8%9290-1.3CDC PLACES
Share aged 65 and over26.9%64·92·+0.3Census ACS 5-year
Share Asian, not Hispanic0%87·14·-0.3Census ACS 5-year
Share Black, not Hispanic0%—5·—Census ACS 5-year
Share in the same house a year ago89.7%44·70·-0.1Census ACS 5-year
Share Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, not Hispanic0%98·83·-0.2Census ACS 5-year
Share never married uncertain22.5%45·12·-0.1Census ACS 5-year
Share now married67.8%90·99·+1.2Census ACS 5-year
Share of births to unmarried women0%84·11·-0.4Census ACS 5-year
Share of some other race, not Hispanic0%100·53·—Census ACS 5-year
Share White, not Hispanic86.2%40·62·+0.1Census ACS 5-year
Share with a bachelor's degree or higher uncertain26%7468+0.3Census ACS 5-year
Sleeping less than 7 hours32.1%7488-0.7CDC PLACES
Stroke2.7%8884-1.1CDC PLACES
Taking blood pressure medication58.9%88·61·+1.2CDC PLACES
Tax returns filed300———IRS Statistics of Income
Tests taken627———Stanford Education Data Archive
Threat of utility shut-off6.3%9190-1.0CDC PLACES
Total population564———Census ACS 5-year
Trend in average test score uncertain0.0525—100—Stanford Education Data Archive
Unemployed11———BLS LAUS
Unemployment rate3.7%2239+0.4BLS LAUS
Vacancy rate uncertain42%90·97·+1.1Census ACS 5-year
Vacant housing units uncertain180———Census ACS 5-year
Vision disability3.7%9291-1.2CDC PLACES
Women aged 15 to 50 uncertain100———Census ACS 5-year
Workers aged 16 and over who commute288———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.