placestats

Wheeler County, NE

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

Population785
Density0.5people per km² of land
Median household income$55,893
Land area1490km²

Its peers

These are the 50 areas most like Wheeler 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: Grant County, ND, Chouteau County, MT, Rock County, NE, Cimarron County, OK, Rosebud County, MT, Judith Basin County, MT, Camas County, ID, Irion County, TX. The peer scores below compare this county with all 50.

Least like its peers

The measures where Wheeler 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
Median age59.9 years100th pct by value100th pct by value +2.2 sd
Depression17.9%100th pct97th pct -2.1 sd
Returns reporting capital gains39.5%98th pct by value100th pct by value +2.0 sd
Frequent mental distress14.5%100th pct98th pct -1.9 sd
Share now married69%100th pct by value99th pct by value +1.9 sd
Business closing rate010th pct by value2nd pct by value -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 here0.4965086-0.1Opportunity Atlas
Adults under 65 without health insurance8%9483-1.2CDC PLACES
Aggregate travel time to work6,090 min———Census ACS 5-year
All natural teeth lost, age 65 and over10.5%9283-0.9CDC PLACES
Any disability25.5%9692-1.5CDC PLACES
Arthritis21.3%9889-1.7CDC PLACES
Binge drinking22.8%104+1.3CDC PLACES
Black Protestant adherents090·45·-0.2
Business closing rate010·2·-1.9Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments14———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments closed0———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business establishments opened0———Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Business opening rate018·2·-1.6Census Business Dynamics Statistics
Cancer other than skin cancer7.5%1211+0.8CDC PLACES
Catholic adherents8.9146·53·-0.4
Child poverty rate, ages 0-17 uncertain18.8%5445-0.2Census SAIPE
Children in the mobility cohort208———Opportunity Atlas
Cholesterol screening82.1%8036+0.9CDC PLACES
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease5.3%9687-1.2CDC PLACES
Cognitive disability12%9897-1.8CDC PLACES
Colorectal cancer screening54%4421-0.0CDC PLACES
Congregations per 10,000 people51.768·95·+0.5
Coronary heart disease5.2%9282-1.0CDC PLACES
Current asthma9.1%9697-1.7CDC PLACES
Current cigarette smoking13.5%8881-0.7CDC PLACES
Dental visit in the past year61.6%6664+0.6CDC PLACES
Departures per 100 people staying6.3572·68·+0.5IRS county migration flows
Depression17.9%10097-2.1CDC PLACES
Diagnosed diabetes8.9%7686-0.7CDC PLACES
Disability-free score1.0798·93·+1.4
Economy score0.99870·61·+0.5
Effective property tax rate uncertain0.91266·56·+0.4Census ACS 5-year
Employed382———BLS LAUS
Evangelical Protestant adherents6.7230·12·-0.5
Fair or poor self-rated health14%9896-1.5CDC PLACES
Fine particulate matter5.74288-0.2County Health Rankings
Flu vaccination among Medicare enrollees0.37%7834+0.8County Health Rankings
Food insecurity10.4%10094-1.1CDC PLACES
Frequent mental distress14.5%10098-1.9CDC PLACES
Frequent physical distress10.7%10096-1.6CDC PLACES
Gini index of income inequality0.4543441+0.1Census ACS 5-year
Gross domestic product$113,700k———BEA Regional Accounts
Health score0.032168·54·+0.5
Hearing disability6.7%8857-0.9CDC PLACES
High blood pressure29.9%6677-0.4CDC PLACES
High cholesterol28.6%6691-0.5CDC PLACES
Homeownership rate80.8%82·85·+0.9Census ACS 5-year
Housing insecurity8.6%10097-1.2CDC PLACES
Housing units603———Census ACS 5-year
Independent-living disability6.4%9895-1.4CDC PLACES
Jail admission rate74514·8·-0.9
Jail population rate98.85·4·-1.1
Labour force392———BLS LAUS
Lack of reliable transportation6.1%10096-1.1CDC PLACES
Lacking social and emotional support20.2%9493-1.1CDC PLACES
Loneliness29.4%9197-1.2CDC PLACES
Mainline Protestant adherents15.162·85·+0.2
Mammography in the past two years72.9%7044+0.6CDC PLACES
Material security score0.70692·77·+1.1
Mean adjusted gross income per return$58,5892721-0.7IRS Statistics of Income
Mean income of departing households$45,80039·26·-0.3IRS county migration flows
Mean travel time to work17.3 min4890-0.3Census ACS 5-year
Median age59.9 years100·100·+2.2Census ACS 5-year
Median gross rent$5256·2·-1.6Census ACS 5-year
Median home value$135,90037·30·-0.5Census ACS 5-year
Median household income$55,893—29—Census ACS 5-year
Median household income (model-based)$56,3773230-0.2Census SAIPE
Median property tax bill1,24054·36·-0.0Census ACS 5-year
Membership organisations0345-1.0County Health Rankings
Mobility disability9.9%9893-1.3CDC PLACES
Net business formation rate058·35·+0.1Census Business Dynamics Statistics
No leisure-time physical activity23.5%6474-0.4CDC PLACES
Obesity38.3%2448+0.7CDC PLACES
Occupied housing units359———Census ACS 5-year
Orthodox Christian adherents098·78·-0.1
Other religion adherents038·11·-0.6
Owner-occupied housing units290———Census ACS 5-year
People covered by a tax return780———IRS Statistics of Income
People per tax return286·90·+1.0IRS Statistics of Income
People who did not move661———IRS county migration flows
Per capita income$39,0769276+1.3Census ACS 5-year
Per capita personal income$78,0647691+0.8BEA Regional Accounts
Personal income$61,436k———BEA Regional Accounts
Population787———BEA Regional Accounts
Population775———County Health Rankings
Population aged 15 and over665———Census ACS 5-year
Population aged 18 and over603———CDC PLACES
Population aged 25 and over632———Census ACS 5-year
Population aged 65 and over253———Census ACS 5-year
Population below the poverty line uncertain41———Census ACS 5-year
Population below the poverty line uncertain99———Census SAIPE
Population for whom poverty status is determined785———Census ACS 5-year
Population for whom poverty status is determined773———Census SAIPE
Population in the same house one year ago718———Census ACS 5-year
Population with a bachelor's degree or higher uncertain187———Census ACS 5-year
Population, decennial census774———
Poverty rate uncertain5.22%10098-1.5Census ACS 5-year
Poverty rate (model-based) uncertain12.8%7856-0.5Census SAIPE
Presidential votes cast, 2000453———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2004453———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2008440———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2012448———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2016465———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2020502———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Presidential votes cast, 2024486———MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Private job growth-3.8518·6·-0.4BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Private jobs200———BLS Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Received food stamps7.3%3·8·-1.0CDC PLACES
Religious adherents30.814·13·-0.8
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200080.571·96·+0.6MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200481.980·96·+0.8MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 200877.771·93·+0.7MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 201278.869·90·+0.5MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 201685.967·93·+0.6MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 202088.182·96·+0.8MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican share of the two-party vote, 202488.280·96·+0.8MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Republican swing, 2000 to 20247.6567·43·+0.5MIT Election Data and Science Lab
Returns claiming charitable contributions0%44·5·-1.0IRS Statistics of Income
Returns claiming the earned income credit0%16·1·-1.6IRS Statistics of Income
Returns reporting capital gains39.5%98·100·+2.0IRS Statistics of Income
Returns reporting unemployment compensation0%58·9·-0.7IRS Statistics of Income
Routine checkup in the past year73.3%84·31·+1.1CDC PLACES
Self-care disability2.7%9893-1.2CDC PLACES
Share aged 65 and over32.2%96·98·+1.4Census ACS 5-year
Share American Indian or Alaska Native, not Hispanic0%—24·—Census ACS 5-year
Share Black, not Hispanic0%—5·—Census ACS 5-year
Share divorced uncertain7.82%15·4·-0.9Census ACS 5-year
Share in the same house a year ago91.5%76·87·+0.6Census ACS 5-year
Share Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, not Hispanic0%97·83·-0.2Census ACS 5-year
Share never married uncertain15.3%2·1·-1.7Census ACS 5-year
Share now married69%100·99·+1.9Census ACS 5-year
Share of births to unmarried women0%65·11·-0.7Census ACS 5-year
Share of some other race, not Hispanic0%100·53·—Census ACS 5-year
Share White, not Hispanic96.8%98·100·+1.0Census ACS 5-year
Share with a bachelor's degree or higher uncertain29.6%8877+0.8Census ACS 5-year
Sleeping less than 7 hours32.2%7888-0.9CDC PLACES
Stroke2.6%9690-1.1CDC PLACES
Taking blood pressure medication58.6%74·55·+1.1CDC PLACES
Tax returns filed380———IRS Statistics of Income
Tests taken736———Stanford Education Data Archive
Threat of utility shut-off6%10093-1.1CDC PLACES
Total population785———Census ACS 5-year
Unemployed10———BLS LAUS
Unemployment rate2.6%6483-0.5BLS LAUS
Vacancy rate40.5%88·97·+1.0Census ACS 5-year
Vacant housing units244———Census ACS 5-year
Vision disability3.6%9893-1.1CDC PLACES
Women aged 15 to 50 uncertain77———Census ACS 5-year
Workers aged 16 and over who commute352———Census ACS 5-year

11of 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.