Calhoun County

Here are recent, high-level demographics for Calhoun County, Iowa. Figures are from the U.S. Census Bureau and rounded; ACS values are 2019–2023 5-year estimates.

Population size

• 2023 population estimate: ~9,400
• 2020 Census: 9,670

Age

• Median age: ~45 years
• Under 18: ~21%
• 18–64: ~58%
• 65 and over: ~21%

Gender

• Male: ~52%
• Female: ~48%

Race/ethnicity (percent of total population)

• White (non-Hispanic): ~89–91%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~3–4%
• Black or African American: ~3–4%
• Two or more races: ~2–3%
• Asian: <1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: <1%

Households

• Total households: ~4,000–4,100
• Average household size: ~2.2
• Family households: ~56%
• Married-couple households: ~47%
• Nonfamily households: ~44%
• Householder living alone and age 65+: ~16–18%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5-year (tables DP05, S0101, S1101) and 2020 Decennial Census; Population Estimates Program (2023).

Calhoun County, IA snapshot (population ~9.5–10k; density ~17 people/sq mi, largely rural).

Estimated email users: 7,800–8,600 residents. Based on state/national adoption applied to the county’s older age mix (roughly 85–90% of residents 13+).

Age pattern (est. share using email):

• 18–29: ~98–99%
• 30–49: ~97–99%
• 50–64: ~93–96%
• 65+: ~75–85%

Gender split: Near parity overall; no meaningful county-level skew expected.

Digital access and trends:

• Household broadband subscription estimated 75–85% (in line with rural Iowa); smartphone-only internet for ~10–15% of adults.
• Fiber and cooperative builds in rural Iowa are expanding service in and near towns; sparse farm areas face longer last‑mile runs and higher costs.
• Cellular data commonly supplements home internet; performance can drop outside town centers.
• Libraries/schools provide public Wi‑Fi and device access that help close gaps.

Connectivity context: Very low population density and agricultural land use raise per‑household network costs, keeping adoption slightly lower among seniors and lower‑income households despite strong usage among working-age adults.

Below is a county-level snapshot built from 2020 Census/ACS demographics, rural Midwest mobile adoption research (Pew, CDC NHIS “wireless-only”), FCC mobile/broadband filings, carrier coverage disclosures, and Iowa cooperative broadband footprints. Because few sources publish Calhoun-specific mobile metrics, figures are presented as reasoned estimates benchmarked against Iowa averages.

Headline estimate

• Population: roughly 9.4–9.8k; adults ~7.2–7.6k; households ~4.1–4.4k
• Adult mobile phone users (any mobile): about 6.6–7.1k (roughly 90–93% of adults)
• Adult smartphone users: about 5.7–6.3k (roughly 78–84% of adults)
• Teens (13–17) with smartphones: about 0.54–0.57k (roughly 90–95% of teens)
• Wireless-only (no landline) households: about 55–62% of households, below Iowa’s statewide rate (roughly mid-60s to near 70%)

What’s different from the Iowa state picture

• Older age structure dampens smartphone saturation: Calhoun has a larger 65+ share than Iowa overall. Senior smartphone adoption likely trails the state by several points, with a noticeably higher share of basic/flip phones and voice/text plans.
• Higher landline retention: Wireless-only household share is several points lower than the state average; legacy landlines remain more common among seniors and farmsteads.
• More prepaid and budget plans: Given lower median income and a larger fixed‑income population, prepaid and lower-cost plans have a higher share than statewide.
• Split reliance on mobile data: In towns served by cooperative fiber, heavy Wi‑Fi offload keeps per‑line mobile data use lower than state averages; conversely, on farmsteads or edges with weaker wireline, mobile hotspots and fixed wireless are used as a primary connection.
• Coverage quality is more bimodal: Near towns and along highways, 5G/LTE performance is solid; a quicker drop-off in indoor and in-vehicle coverage appears in outlying areas compared with Iowa’s metro corridors.
• Post-ACP pressure: The 2024 wind-down of the Affordable Connectivity Program likely had outsized effects locally, leading to plan downgrades, line churn, and a pause in 5G home internet adoption relative to urban Iowa.

Demographic breakdown of mobile use (estimates)

• Seniors (65+): 65–70% smartphone adoption; 85–90% any mobile. Higher landline retention and basic-phone use than statewide.
• Adults 30–64: 85–90% smartphone adoption; 95%+ any mobile. Strong BYOD for small ag and trades; some dual-SIM/second lines for farm operations.
• Young adults (18–29): 95%+ smartphone adoption, near parity with statewide norms.
• Teens (13–17): 90–95% smartphone access; school-issued devices and home Wi‑Fi in fiber-served towns reduce cellular data dependency on school days.
• Income/plan type: Larger share of prepaid and value MVNO lines than statewide; device upgrade cycles run longer (more 3–4+ year device retention).

Digital infrastructure and coverage notes

• Carriers present: AT&T, Verizon, T‑Mobile are the primary networks; UScellular historically has a footprint in rural Iowa but is in transition as assets change hands. Roaming has diminished as nationwide carriers expand rural coverage.
• 5G:
  • T‑Mobile mid-band 5G is common in/near towns and along main corridors (e.g., US‑20), with good capacity; rural stretches fall back to low‑band 5G/LTE.
  • Verizon has broad LTE, with C‑band 5G nodes concentrated near population centers; low‑band 5G/LTE elsewhere.
  • AT&T 5G is mostly low‑band across the countryside, with mid‑band capacity more limited than in Iowa metros.
• Performance pattern:
  • In-town: mid-band 5G often 100–300 Mbps down, robust VoLTE/VoNR; good for 5G home internet where available.
  • Out-of-town: LTE or low‑band 5G often 5–40 Mbps down with higher variance; metal buildings and tree lines affect indoor coverage. Signal boosters are more common than statewide.
• Fixed broadband interplay:
  • Webster-Calhoun Cooperative Telephone Association (WCCTA) and other local providers have built extensive fiber in towns and many rural routes, giving strong home Wi‑Fi offload where available.
  • Cable is present in some towns; legacy DSL pockets persist where fiber hasn’t reached.
  • 5G Home Internet (T‑Mobile/Verizon) is available in and around towns but becomes spotty in the far rural edges due to signal and capacity constraints.
• Emergency/location: E911 location and call reliability are generally good in towns/highways; marginal indoor locations on the fringes see more call drops than in Iowa’s urban counties.

Quantified takeaways versus Iowa overall

• Mobile adoption (any phone): slightly lower than state, driven by seniors; gap around 2–4 percentage points.
• Smartphone adoption: notably lower among 65+, creating a 3–6 point overall county‑state gap.
• Wireless-only households: 3–8 points lower than statewide.
• 5G mid-band reach and speeds: present but less ubiquitous than in metro Iowa; greater reliance on LTE fallback.
• Plan mix: higher prepaid/value MVNO share; longer device lifecycles.

Implications for stakeholders

• Carriers: Prioritize mid-band 5G infill between towns and along county roads; market signal boosters and Wi‑Fi calling. Affordable plans and senior-friendly devices will outperform flagship upgrades.
• Public sector: Continue fiber buildouts on rural laterals; target digital literacy and senior smartphone onboarding to close the largest local gap with the state.
• Businesses and services: Assume mixed connectivity in outlying areas; design mobile sites/apps to be resilient on LTE with limited bandwidth.

Method note Figures are small-area estimates triangulated from county demographics, rural adoption research, FCC filings, and known cooperative fiber footprints in Calhoun County. For planning, validate against current FCC Broadband Data Collection, carrier coverage tools, and local provider build maps.

Below is a concise, best-available snapshot for Calhoun County, IA. Because hyper-local platform data isn’t published, figures are modeled from Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. social media benchmarks and typical rural Midwest usage, adjusted to the county’s older age profile. Treat all percentages as estimates.

County context and user base

• Population: ~9,600 residents
• Residents 13+: ~8,000
• At least monthly social media users (13+): ~6,200–6,800 (≈75–85% of 13+)

Most-used platforms (estimated share of residents 13+ using monthly)

• YouTube: 70–80%
• Facebook: 65–75%
• Instagram: 30–40%
• TikTok: 28–35%
• Snapchat: 25–35% (concentrated under 30)
• Pinterest: 30–38% (skews female 25–54)
• WhatsApp: 10–18% (lower than national average)
• X (Twitter): 10–18% (niche: sports, markets, weather)
• LinkedIn: 12–18% (lower in rural labor markets)
• Nextdoor: 0–5% (limited neighborhood coverage)

Age profile of active users (share of all local social media users)

• 13–17: ~8%
• 18–29: ~16%
• 30–49: ~30% (largest cohort)
• 50–64: ~25%
• 65+: ~21%

Gender breakdown (all platforms combined; estimated)

• Women: ~52–56% of active users
• Men: ~44–48% Platform skews: Facebook and Pinterest tilt female; YouTube, X, Reddit tilt male; Snapchat/TikTok more balanced but younger.

Behavioral trends to know

• Facebook is the community hub: local news, school sports, churches, county/city pages, emergency/weather alerts, buy/sell/Marketplace, and event promotion get the highest engagement.
• Video is rising: YouTube for how‑to, equipment repairs, home projects; TikTok/shorts consumption growing across ages but posting is concentrated among under‑35.
• Messaging habits: Facebook Messenger and Snapchat are primary; SMS remains common. WhatsApp usage is modest.
• Timing: Engagement peaks evenings (6–9 p.m.) and during weather events, school seasons, county fair/4‑H/FFA activities, and harvest.
• Commerce: Local SMBs rely on boosted Facebook posts; Marketplace is a go‑to for farm/outdoor gear and vehicles. Instagram is used by boutiques/beauty/fitness targeting women 18–44.
• Content preferences: Practical/locally relevant posts outperform polish—community updates, road closures, obituaries, sports highlights, lost/found, and seasonal ag content.
• Trust dynamics: Posts from known local people/pages carry outsized credibility; private groups help reduce political noise.

Notes on method

• Estimates derived from Pew Research Center (2024) U.S. social media adoption by platform and age, adjusted for rural adoption patterns and the county’s older age structure (American Community Survey). For planning, use ranges above and validate with page insights or local polls.