Search for Indicators
Disparities Dashboard
Indicator Gauge Icon Legend
Legend Colors
Red is bad, green is good, blue is not statistically different/neutral.
Compared to Distribution
the value is in the best half of communities.
the value is in the 2nd worst quarter of communities.
the value is in the worst quarter of communities.
Compared to Target
meets target; 
does not meet target.
Compared to a Single Value
lower than the comparison value;
higher than the comparison value;
not statistically different from comparison value.
Trend
non-significant change over time; 
significant change over time; 
no change over time.
Compared to Prior Value
higher than the previous measurement period;
lower than the previous measurement period;
no statistically different change from previous measurement period.
Significantly better than the overall value
Significantly worse than the overall value
Significantly different than the overall value
No significant difference with the overall value
No data on significance available
County: Placer
Health / Alcohol & Drug Use
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Fentanyl Overdose
County: Placer Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Fentanyl Overdose
11.2
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(16.6)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(9.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Age-Adjusted Drug and Opioid-Involved Overdose Death Rate
County: Placer Age-Adjusted Drug and Opioid-Involved Overdose Death Rate
14.4
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 48 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,303 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(16.5)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(23.5)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12.9)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
County: Placer Death Rate due to Drug Poisoning
County: Placer Death Rate due to Drug Poisoning
17.1
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2019-2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 54 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,899 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(22.0)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(27.2)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
HP 2030 Target
(20.7)
<div>SU-03: Reduce drug overdose deaths <strong>(LEADING HEALTH INDICATOR)</strong></div>
County: Placer
Health / Cancer
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Breast Cancer Incidence Rate
County: Placer Breast Cancer Incidence Rate
136.8
Cases per 100,000 females
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 56 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,478 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(121.0)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(127.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(142.8)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Cancer: Medicare Population
County: Placer Cancer: Medicare Population
13.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate
County: Placer Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate
33.2
Cases per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 56 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,401 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(33.5)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(36.5)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(34.2)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate
County: Placer Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate
38.8
Cases per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 55 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,471 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(37.6)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(54.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(40.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Mammography Screening: Medicare Population
County: Placer Mammography Screening: Medicare Population
48.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,123 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(41.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(47.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(49.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Oral Cavity and Pharynx Cancer Incidence Rate
County: Placer Oral Cavity and Pharynx Cancer Incidence Rate
12.6
Cases per 100,000 population
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 54 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,706 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(10.1)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(11.9)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(13.8)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Prostate Cancer Incidence Rate
County: Placer Prostate Cancer Incidence Rate
111.2
Cases per 100,000 males
(2016-2020)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 57 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,500 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(95.4)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(110.5)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(111.4)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Diabetes
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Adults with Diabetes
County: Placer Adults with Diabetes
6.5%
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(10.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(11.5% in 2022)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
Prior Value
(6.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Diabetes: Medicare Population
County: Placer Diabetes: Medicare Population
20.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(21.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(19.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Disabilities
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Adults with Disability
County: Placer Adults with Disability
29.4%
(2016)
Compared to:
CA Value
(29.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(20.6% in 2015)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
Prior Value
(31.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Children with a Disability
County: Placer Children with a Disability
2.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(3.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty
County: Placer Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty
4.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(4.6%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Persons with a Disability
County: Placer Persons with a Disability
11.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Persons with a Hearing Difficulty
County: Placer Persons with a Hearing Difficulty
3.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(2.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty
County: Placer Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty
2.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(2.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Persons with a Vision Difficulty
County: Placer Persons with a Vision Difficulty
1.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(2.1%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty
County: Placer Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty
5.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Family Planning
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Teen Birth Rate: 15-19
County: Placer Teen Birth Rate: 15-19
4.7
Live births per 1,000 females aged 15-19
(2019-2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 55 California counties.
CA Value
(10.3)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(13.9 in 2021)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics
Prior Value
(5.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Health Care Access & Quality
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Children with Health Insurance
County: Placer Children with Health Insurance
97.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 42 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 828 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(96.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(94.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(98.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer People Delayed or had Difficulty Obtaining Care
County: Placer People Delayed or had Difficulty Obtaining Care
16.5%
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(16.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(17.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(5.9%)
County: Placer Persons with Health Insurance
County: Placer Persons with Health Insurance
96.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,140 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(91.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(95.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(92.4%)
<div>AHS-01: Increase the proportion of people with health insurance <strong>(LEADING HEALTH INDICATOR)</strong></div>
County: Placer Persons with Private Health Insurance Only
County: Placer Persons with Private Health Insurance Only
62.7%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(53.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(54.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(62.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Persons with Public Health Insurance Only
County: Placer Persons with Public Health Insurance Only
17.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(29.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(24.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(17.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Preventable Hospital Stays: Medicare Population
County: Placer Preventable Hospital Stays: Medicare Population
1,705.0
Discharges per 100,000 Medicare enrollees
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(2,275.0)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(2,677.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(1,532.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Health Information Technology
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Persons with an Internet Subscription
County: Placer Persons with an Internet Subscription
94.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(93.4%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(91.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Heart Disease & Stroke
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Age-Adjusted Hospitalization Rate due to Heart Attack
County: Placer Age-Adjusted Hospitalization Rate due to Heart Attack
23.4
Hospitalizations per 10,000 population 35+ years
(2020)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(21.1)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(27.9)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Atrial Fibrillation: Medicare Population
County: Placer Atrial Fibrillation: Medicare Population
15.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(13.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(14.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(14.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Heart Failure: Medicare Population
County: Placer Heart Failure: Medicare Population
9.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(10.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(9.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer High Blood Pressure Prevalence
County: Placer High Blood Pressure Prevalence
34.5%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(34.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(32.4% in 2021)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
Prior Value
(30.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(41.9%)
County: Placer Hyperlipidemia: Medicare Population
County: Placer Hyperlipidemia: Medicare Population
64.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(61.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(65.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(62.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Hypertension: Medicare Population
County: Placer Hypertension: Medicare Population
60.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(58.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(65.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(59.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Ischemic Heart Disease: Medicare Population
County: Placer Ischemic Heart Disease: Medicare Population
17.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(18.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(21.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(17.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Stroke: Medicare Population
County: Placer Stroke: Medicare Population
5.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(5.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(5.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Immunizations & Infectious Diseases
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Flu Vaccinations: Medicare Population
County: Placer Flu Vaccinations: Medicare Population
51.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(48.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(50.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(49.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Persons Fully Vaccinated Against COVID-19
County: Placer Persons Fully Vaccinated Against COVID-19
69.9%
(May 10, 2023)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 50 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,125 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(69.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Pneumonia Vaccinations: Medicare Population
County: Placer Pneumonia Vaccinations: Medicare Population
8.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(8.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(8.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(6.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Maternal, Fetal & Infant Health
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Any In-Hospital Breastfeeding
County: Placer Any In-Hospital Breastfeeding
96.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(93.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(95.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Babies with Low Birthweight
County: Placer Babies with Low Birthweight
5.8%
(2020-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(7.2%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(8.5% in 2021)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Prior Value
(5.7%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer In-Hospital Exclusive Breastfeeding
County: Placer In-Hospital Exclusive Breastfeeding
86.5%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(68.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(85.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Mothers who Received Early Prenatal Care
County: Placer Mothers who Received Early Prenatal Care
88.0%
(2019-2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(87.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(78.3% in 2021)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Prior Value
(87.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Preterm Births
County: Placer Preterm Births
7.7%
(2020-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(9.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(7.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(9.4%)
County: Placer
Health / Mental Health & Mental Disorders
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Adults Needing and Receiving Behavioral Health Care Services
County: Placer Adults Needing and Receiving Behavioral Health Care Services
61.2%
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(55.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(56.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Adults Who Ever Thought Seriously About Committing Suicide
County: Placer Adults Who Ever Thought Seriously About Committing Suicide
17.2%
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(19.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(14.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Adults with Likely Serious Psychological Distress
County: Placer Adults with Likely Serious Psychological Distress
14.9%
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(16.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(13.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Depression: Medicare Population
County: Placer Depression: Medicare Population
15.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(14.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(15.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Mortality Data
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Life Expectancy
County: Placer Life Expectancy
81.8
Years
(2019-2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 57 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,070 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(79.9)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(77.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Placer
Health / Nutrition & Healthy Eating
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Adult Fast Food Consumption
County: Placer Adult Fast Food Consumption
70.8%
(2016)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(65.6%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(51.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Child and Teen Fruit Consumption
County: Placer Child and Teen Fruit Consumption
73.2%
(2019-2020)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(69.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
County: Placer
Health / Older Adults
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Adults 65+ with a Disability
County: Placer Adults 65+ with a Disability
30.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(33.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(33.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Adults 65+ with a Hearing Difficulty
County: Placer Adults 65+ with a Hearing Difficulty
13.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Adults 65+ with a Self-Care Difficulty
County: Placer Adults 65+ with a Self-Care Difficulty
6.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(9.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(7.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Adults 65+ with a Vision Difficulty
County: Placer Adults 65+ with a Vision Difficulty
4.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(6.1%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Adults 65+ with an Independent Living Difficulty
County: Placer Adults 65+ with an Independent Living Difficulty
12.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(16.4%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(13.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Alzheimer's Disease or Dementia: Medicare Population
County: Placer Alzheimer's Disease or Dementia: Medicare Population
5.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(5.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(5.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Other Conditions
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Chronic Kidney Disease: Medicare Population
County: Placer Chronic Kidney Disease: Medicare Population
17.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(16.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(18.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(16.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Osteoporosis: Medicare Population
County: Placer Osteoporosis: Medicare Population
13.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(13.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(11.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Rheumatoid Arthritis or Osteoarthritis: Medicare Population
County: Placer Rheumatoid Arthritis or Osteoarthritis: Medicare Population
37.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(32.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(35.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(35.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Physical Activity
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Adults 20+ who are Sedentary
County: Placer Adults 20+ who are Sedentary
13.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(11.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Respiratory Diseases
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Adults with Asthma
County: Placer Adults with Asthma
21.7%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(17.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(15.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
Prior Value
(16.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Asthma: Medicare Population
County: Placer Asthma: Medicare Population
7.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(7.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(7.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(7.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer COPD: Medicare Population
County: Placer COPD: Medicare Population
8.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(8.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(9.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Sexually Transmitted Infections
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Chlamydia Incidence Rate
County: Placer Chlamydia Incidence Rate
209.0
Cases per 100,000 population
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(484.7)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(495.5)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention
Prior Value
(234.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Gonorrhea Incidence Rate
County: Placer Gonorrhea Incidence Rate
71.6
Cases per 100,000 population
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(230.9)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(214.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention
Prior Value
(64.2)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Syphilis Incidence Rate
County: Placer Syphilis Incidence Rate
8.6
Cases per 100,000 population
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(22.3)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(16.2)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention
Prior Value
(11.6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Weight Status
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Adults Who Are Obese
County: Placer Adults Who Are Obese
22.3%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(28.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(33.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
Prior Value
(31.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Adults who are Overweight or Obese
County: Placer Adults who are Overweight or Obese
59.6%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(62.3%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(67.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
Prior Value
(66.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Health / Wellness & Lifestyle
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Self-Reported General Health Assessment: Good or Better
County: Placer Self-Reported General Health Assessment: Good or Better
91.7%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(86.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(91.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Community / Civic Engagement
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Voter Engagement
County: Placer Voter Engagement
78.1%
Percent of adults
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(66.2%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(74.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Community / Crime & Crime Prevention
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Adult Arrest Rate
County: Placer Adult Arrest Rate
22.6
Arrests per 1,000 population 18+
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(25.1)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(24.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Hate Crime Offenses
County: Placer Hate Crime Offenses
18
Offenses
(2022)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Juvenile Arrest Rate
County: Placer Juvenile Arrest Rate
2.7
Arrests per 1,000 population aged 0-17
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 57 California counties.
CA Value
(2.8)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(1.9)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Community / Demographics
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Foreign Born Persons
County: Placer Foreign Born Persons
12.0%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(26.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(13.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Veteran Population
County: Placer Veteran Population
7.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(4.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(6.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Community / Social Environment
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Substantiated Child Abuse Rate
County: Placer Substantiated Child Abuse Rate
3.1
Cases per 1,000 children
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(6.1)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(8.2 in 2021)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Children's Bureau
Prior Value
(3.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.7)
County: Placer
Community / Transportation
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Mean Travel Time to Work
County: Placer Mean Travel Time to Work
27.6
Minutes
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,131 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(29.2)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(26.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Workers Commuting by Public Transportation
County: Placer Workers Commuting by Public Transportation
0.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
(2015-2019)
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(3.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(5.3%)
County: Placer Workers who Drive Alone to Work
County: Placer Workers who Drive Alone to Work
71.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(68.4%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(71.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Workers who Walk to Work
County: Placer Workers who Walk to Work
1.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Economy / Food Insecurity
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Adults Receiving Food Stamp Benefits
County: Placer Adults Receiving Food Stamp Benefits
17.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(28.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
County: Placer
Economy / Homelessness
Value
Compared to:
41
Persons
(2022)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Point-in-Time Count of Veterans Experiencing Homelessness
County: Placer Point-in-Time Count of Veterans Experiencing Homelessness
42
Persons
(2022)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(40)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Sheltered Homeless
County: Placer Sheltered Homeless
342
Persons
(2022)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(357)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Total Homeless Population
County: Placer Total Homeless Population
750
Persons
(2022)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(708)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Unsheltered Homeless
County: Placer Unsheltered Homeless
408
Persons
(2022)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(351)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Economy / Housing & Homes
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Overcrowded Households
County: Placer Overcrowded Households
2.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(8.2%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(3.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Renters Spending 30% or More of Household Income on Rent
County: Placer Renters Spending 30% or More of Household Income on Rent
55.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,132 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(54.4%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(49.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.5%)
County: Placer
Economy / Income
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Gender Pay Gap
County: Placer Gender Pay Gap
$0.65
Cents on the dollar
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
($0.74)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
($0.72)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Households Below the Real Cost Measure
County: Placer Households Below the Real Cost Measure
20.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 34 California counties.
CA Value
(34.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
County: Placer Median Household Income
County: Placer Median Household Income
$109,375
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,132 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
($91,905)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
($75,149)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Per Capita Income
County: Placer Per Capita Income
$54,004
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
($45,591)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
($41,261)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Economy / Poverty
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Children Living Below Poverty Level
County: Placer Children Living Below Poverty Level
6.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,132 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(15.6%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(16.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer Families Living Below Poverty Level
County: Placer Families Living Below Poverty Level
4.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,104 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(8.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(8.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer People 65+ Living Below Poverty Level
County: Placer People 65+ Living Below Poverty Level
7.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(10.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer People 65+ Living Below Poverty Level (Count)
County: Placer People 65+ Living Below Poverty Level (Count)
5,757
People
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer People Living Below Poverty Level
County: Placer People Living Below Poverty Level
6.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(12.1%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(12.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.0%)
County: Placer Youth not in School or Working
County: Placer Youth not in School or Working
1.2%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,130 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(1.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(1.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Education / Educational Attainment
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer People 25+ with a Bachelor's Degree or Higher
County: Placer People 25+ with a Bachelor's Degree or Higher
42.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(35.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(34.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer People 25+ with a High School Diploma or Higher
County: Placer People 25+ with a High School Diploma or Higher
94.9%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(84.4%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(89.1%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Placer
Environmental Health / Built Environment
Value
Compared to:
County: Placer Access to Parks
County: Placer Access to Parks
0.7%
(2020)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(79.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(0.7%)
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.
