Carroll County

Here are key, recent demographics for Carroll County, Indiana.

Population

• Total: 20,306 (2020 Census)
• 2023 estimate: ~20.3K (little net change since 2020)

Age

• Under 18: ~23–24%
• 65 and over: ~19%
• Median age: ~42–43 years

Gender

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Race and ethnicity (ACS 2018–2022)

• White (non-Hispanic): ~89–91%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~6–7%
• Two or more races: ~2–3%
• Black or African American: ~0.3–0.5%
• Asian: ~0.2–0.4%
• American Indian/Alaska Native and other: <0.5% each

Households and housing (ACS 2018–2022)

• Households: ~7,900–8,000
• Persons per household: ~2.6
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~79–81%
• Median household income (in 2022 dollars): ~$68–71K
• Persons in poverty: ~8–9%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2018–2022 American Community Survey 5-year estimates).

Carroll County, IN snapshot (estimates, scaled from national/Indiana rural benchmarks):

• Estimated email users: 14,000–16,000 residents (about 70–80% of the ~20.3k population), reflecting high adoption among adults with internet access.
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 13–17: ~5% (lower reliance vs. messaging apps)
  • 18–34: ~20–25%
  • 35–64: ~45–50% (largest share)
  • 65+: ~20–25% (growing as senior connectivity rises)
• Gender split: roughly even (near 50/50).
• Digital access trends:
  • Most households have internet subscriptions, with a sizable majority on broadband; a notable minority are smartphone‑only.
  • Usage skews heavier on mobile for quick communications; email remains standard for work, school, government, and healthcare.
  • Access is strongest in towns (e.g., cable/fiber footprints), with DSL/fixed‑wireless common in rural areas; satellite fills remaining gaps.
  • Mobile networks provide broad 4G coverage; 5G is expanding around population centers.

Local density/connectivity context:

• Population density is low—about 54 residents per square mile across ~375 square miles—raising last‑mile costs and creating patchy high‑speed availability outside towns.
• Libraries, schools, and public buildings serve as important Wi‑Fi access points for residents without reliable home broadband.

Carroll County, IN – mobile phone usage snapshot (focus on what differs from statewide patterns)

Executive takeaways

• Adoption is high but skews a bit lower than Indiana’s urbanized average, with more prepaid users, more Android share, and more “cellular-only” households than the state as a whole.
• Coverage is generally reliable along towns and corridors but capacity is constrained outside population centers; 5G here is mostly low‑band for coverage, with mid‑band/capacity 5G still spotty compared to statewide metro buildouts.
• Fixed wireless (5G home internet) and cellular hotspots play a larger role than in most of Indiana due to patchier wired broadband outside Delphi/Flora.

User estimates (order‑of‑magnitude, rounded; see methods)

• Population base: roughly 20–21k residents; 15–16k adults.
• Adult smartphone users: about 12.5k–14k (rural adoption tends to be a few points under the state’s urban/suburban average).
• Adults using any mobile phone (smartphone or basic): about 13.5k–15k.
• Teens with phones (approx. ages 13–17): 1.0k–1.4k.
• Households with at least one smartphone: likely 6.0k–7.0k out of roughly 7.5k–8.0k households.
• Households relying primarily on cellular for home internet: meaningfully higher share than the Indiana average (common in rural blocks), with noticeable uptake of carrier fixed‑wireless (5G Home/Internet) around Delphi/Flora and along main corridors.

Demographic/usage patterns that diverge from state‑level

• Age profile: An older median age than the state tilts a small but visible slice of users toward basic phones or limited‑data plans; family plans still dominate, but there is more device longevity and repair/reuse than in metro Indiana.
• Plan mix: Higher prepaid/MVNO penetration than the state average, driven by price sensitivity and variable credit scoring; this goes with heavier Android share and fewer premium iPhone SKUs than in major metros.
• Work patterns: Agriculture, trades, and manufacturing shifts drive demand for wide‑area coverage, reliable voice/text, and push‑to‑talk apps; on‑farm coverage boosters and hotspot tethering are more common than statewide.
• Home internet substitution: A larger fraction of households use mobile data as their primary or backup connection compared with the Indiana average, especially outside Delphi/Flora/Burlington/Camden.
• Messaging/app mix: Group SMS/MMS and cross‑platform chat (e.g., WhatsApp/Facebook Messenger) remain important because of mixed ecosystems; RCS/iMessage lock‑in is less complete than in urban counties.

Digital infrastructure highlights (relative to broader Indiana)

• Coverage footprint
  • 4G LTE: Near‑universal outdoors on primary roads and in towns; indoor coverage in metal‑roof farm structures can be inconsistent without boosters.
  • 5G: Low‑band 5G (AT&T n5, T‑Mobile n71) is prevalent for coverage. Mid‑band 5G (Verizon/AT&T n77, T‑Mobile n41) is spotty and concentrated near towns and along SR‑25/SR‑18; capacity falls off quickly in rural blocks. This lags metro Indiana, where mid‑band is now common.
• Capacity and speeds
  • Median speeds are lower and more variable than the state average; busy‑hour slowdowns are more pronounced because towers cover larger footprints and some sites still rely on microwave backhaul.
  • Inter‑carrier gaps are wider than in cities. Verizon and AT&T tend to hold the edge for rural reach; T‑Mobile capacity is strong where n41 is lit (town centers), but fades outside.
• Tower density and siting
  • Fewer macro sites per square mile than state average; sites cluster around Delphi, Flora, and main corridors (SR‑25, SR‑18, US‑421 edges). Flat terrain helps reach, but the Wabash River corridor and wooded pockets can create dead zones.
• Home broadband interplay
  • Fiber/coax is available in town centers; availability drops quickly in the countryside. That drives higher reliance on:
    • Carrier fixed‑wireless (Verizon 5G Home, T‑Mobile Home Internet) where mid‑band 5G is reachable.
    • Hotspot plans for work/school in outlying areas.
  • Ongoing state and federal grants (e.g., Next Level Connections, BEAD) are targeting rural fiber; as those builds complete, reliance on mobile‑only at home should ease over the next 2–3 years.
• Devices and accessories
  • Above‑average use of signal boosters (FCC‑certified repeaters) in homes, barns, and vehicles.
  • More ruggedized/entry‑tier Android handsets in fieldwork; iPhone penetration grows in town centers and among younger users.

How Carroll County’s trends differ most from Indiana overall

• A few points lower smartphone adoption and a higher share of basic phones among older adults.
• Higher prepaid/MVNO share and Android share; lower incidence of premium device financing.
• More cellular‑only and cellular‑primary households; higher uptake of carrier fixed‑wireless.
• Slower and patchier mid‑band 5G rollout; larger rural cells and more microwave backhaul lead to lower, more variable speeds than the statewide median.
• Wider performance spread between carriers outside towns; coverage reliability takes precedence over raw speed for many users.

Notes on sources and method

• Population/household anchors reflect recent Census/ACS ranges for Carroll County; adult smartphone adoption and plan mix are inferred from Pew Research national adoption, rural vs. urban differentials, and ACS Computer and Internet Use patterns (rural counties show higher cellular reliance and lower wireline penetration). Carrier infrastructure observations reflect typical rural‑Indiana deployment patterns (low‑band 5G coverage first, mid‑band concentrated in towns), statewide carrier announcements, and measured differences commonly seen in speed‑test aggregates for rural counties. Figures are presented as ranges to reflect uncertainty and year‑to‑year change. For a precise brief, pair this with the latest ACS S2801 county table and current FCC mobile coverage/availability maps.

Below is a compact, county‑specific snapshot using the latest publicly available national and state/rural benchmarks (Pew Research Center 2024 + U.S. Census/ACS) scaled to Carroll County’s size and age profile. Direct county‑level platform data are limited, so figures are estimates with ranges.

Headline size and penetration

• Population: ~20,300 (2020 Census). Adults (18+): ~15,500–15,900.
• Estimated active social media users (13+): ~13,000–14,000 (about 65–70% of total population; roughly 75–80% of adults).

Most‑used platforms (estimated share of adults using the platform at least monthly)

• YouTube: 70–80%
• Facebook: 65–75%
• Instagram: 30–40%
• TikTok: 25–35%
• Snapchat: 20–30% (much higher among teens/early 20s)
• Pinterest: 25–35% (skews female)
• X/Twitter: 15–20%
• Reddit: 15–20% (skews male, 18–34)
• LinkedIn: 15–25% (commuters/professionals)
• WhatsApp: 10–15%
• Nextdoor: <10% (Facebook Groups fill this role locally)

Age patterns (approximate penetration by cohort)

• 13–17: 90–95% use social media; heavy Snapchat/TikTok; Instagram secondary; YouTube daily.
• 18–29: 85–90%; Instagram/TikTok/Snapchat dominant; YouTube universal; Facebook used for groups/events.
• 30–49: 80–85%; Facebook + Messenger central (groups, Marketplace, school/sports); Instagram rising; YouTube for DIY.
• 50–64: 70–75%; Facebook first; YouTube for news/how‑to; TikTok adoption growing but still minority.
• 65+: 50–60%; Facebook for family/church/community; YouTube for entertainment/how‑to; lower use of newer apps.

Gender breakdown (directional)

• Overall users likely skew slightly female (by 1–3 percentage points), reflecting Facebook/Instagram usage.
• Female‑leaning platforms locally: Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest.
• Male‑leaning platforms locally: YouTube, Reddit, X/Twitter.
• Marketplace and Groups participation is mixed but often female‑led for household, school, and event content; male‑led for vehicles, tools, and farm equipment.

Behavioral trends (what people do and engage with)

• Hyper‑local first: School updates, youth and high‑school sports, church events, county/city notices, road closures, weather/snow days, lost/found pets. Facebook Groups are the hub.
• Marketplace culture: Heavy buy/sell/trade for vehicles, tools, farm/rural gear, furniture; coordination via Facebook Messenger.
• Video preferences: Short vertical clips (Facebook Reels/TikTok) for quick local highlights; YouTube for DIY, equipment repair, hunting/fishing, home and auto maintenance.
• Event cycles: Spikes around school athletics, 4‑H/county fair season, seasonal festivals/holidays, severe weather.
• Timing: Highest engagement typically early morning (6–8 am), lunch (11:30 am–1 pm), and evening (7–9 pm), with weekend peaks—consistent with shift/work and family schedules.
• Trust and sharing: Local administrators (schools, churches, civic orgs) and well‑known community figures/pages drive shares; cross‑posting between Groups is common.
• Messaging over SMS: Younger users lean on Snapchat/Instagram DMs; adults widely use Facebook Messenger for transactions and coordination.

Notes on methodology

• Figures are modeled from Pew’s 2024 U.S. platform adoption by age + rural adjustments, applied to Carroll County’s size/age mix from Census/ACS. County‑specific platform counts are not publicly reported; use ranges above for planning and benchmarking.