Hancock County

Hancock County, Iowa — Key demographics

Population

• 10,795 (2020 Census). Down about 4.8% from 11,341 in 2010.
• ~10.7k (2019–2023 ACS 5-year estimate).

Age

• Median age: ~44 years (ACS 2019–2023).
• Under 18: ~22–23%; 65 and over: ~20–21% (ACS).

Sex

• Female: ~50%; Male: ~50% (ACS).

Race and ethnicity (2020 Census unless noted)

• Non-Hispanic White: ~89–91%.
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~6–7%.
• Non-Hispanic Black: ~0.4–0.6%.
• Non-Hispanic Asian: ~0.3–0.5%.
• Non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.2–0.3%.
• Two or more races (non-Hispanic): ~2–3%.

Households and families (ACS 2019–2023)

• Households: ~4.6–4.8k; average household size ~2.3.
• Family households: ~60–63% of households; married-couple families ~50–53%.
• Households with children under 18: ~25–28%.
• Nonfamily households: ~37–40%; living alone ~32–35%; age 65+ living alone ~14–16%.
• Housing units: ~5.1–5.3k; owner-occupied ~75–80%; renter-occupied ~20–25%.

Insights

• Small, slowly declining, and aging population.
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White with a modest Hispanic/Latino community.
• High owner-occupancy and smaller household sizes typical of rural Iowa.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census (PL 94-171, DHC) and American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year estimates.

Hancock County, IA snapshot:

• Population: 10,795 (2020 Census) over ~571 sq mi; density ~19 people/sq mi.
• Digital access (ACS 2018–2022): 92% of households have a computer; 84% have a broadband subscription (about 16% lack fixed broadband at home). County broadband adoption is a bit below the Iowa average (~88%).
• Estimated email users: ≈6,800 adults (about 81% of the county’s 8,300 adults), based on local broadband access and the share of internet users who use email (92%, Pew).
• Age distribution of email users: 18–34 ≈24%; 35–64 ≈52%; 65+ ≈24% (usage remains majority even among seniors, but lower than younger groups).
• Gender split among users: roughly even (≈50% female, 50% male), mirroring county demographics.
• Trends and connectivity: Broadband subscription has increased since 2016, driven by fiber buildouts in towns and fixed‑wireless coverage in rural areas. Low population density and longer last‑mile distances create pockets with slower speeds or higher costs outside population centers like Garner and Britt, but high device ownership sustains robust email use.

Mobile phone usage in Hancock County, Iowa — summary and county-vs-state contrasts

Baseline size and user estimates

• Population. Hancock County counted 10,795 residents in the 2020 Census; current estimates place the county just over 10,600 residents.
• Adult smartphone users. Using rural adoption rates aligned with recent Pew findings (roughly 80–82% of adults in rural areas own a smartphone) and Hancock’s older age profile, the county likely has about 6,800–7,100 adult smartphone users.
• Mobile-only home internet. Due to patchier fixed broadband outside town centers, smartphone-only or cellular-only home internet reliance is likely modestly above state norms. A reasonable estimate is roughly 18–22% of households using mobile as their primary home internet option, concentrated in unincorporated areas and on farms.

Demographic profile and its effect on usage

• Age. Hancock County skews older than Iowa overall, with a notably higher share of residents 65+. This tends to reduce overall smartphone adoption by several percentage points versus the state average and increases the share of basic/feature phones among seniors.
• Income and affordability. Median household income is below the Iowa median, which correlates with cost-sensitive plan selection (limited-data or bundled family plans) and longer device replacement cycles.
• Race and ethnicity. The county is predominantly non-Hispanic White with smaller shares of Hispanic and Black residents than Iowa overall; language-access needs are present but less prevalent than in urban counties.
• Occupation mix. Agriculture and trades are relatively more prominent than statewide averages, increasing reliance on wide-area coverage for field operations, telematics, and seasonal workforce mobility.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Carrier landscape. All three national carriers (AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon) operate in the county, alongside UScellular, which maintains a meaningful footprint across rural Iowa.
• 4G LTE. Generally continuous outdoor LTE along the US-18 corridor (Garner–Britt) and in town centers; occasional weak-signal pockets persist on gravel roads, in tree cover, and in low-lying areas.
• 5G. Low-band 5G is present across and between towns; mid-band 5G is more common in and near Garner and Britt and along primary corridors. Coverage and capacity step down faster outside towns than in urban Iowa counties.
• Fixed broadband interplay. Fiber is available in and around town centers; cable and aging DSL exist in legacy footprints; fixed wireless (WISPs) and mobile 5G home internet fill rural gaps. This mix contributes to above-average reliance on cellular for primary or backup home internet in the countryside.
• Public safety and resiliency. Severe-weather season highlights the value of redundant connectivity; cellular remains the primary alerting path for many households, but residents often keep weather radios as backup due to known dead zones.

How Hancock County differs from Iowa overall

• Adoption level. Smartphone adoption among adults is estimated a few points lower than Iowa’s statewide level (near the national ~85%) because Hancock is older and more rural than the state average.
• Mobile-only reliance. A higher share of households rely on mobile or cellular-only internet than the statewide average, driven by fiber/cable gaps outside towns and seasonal agricultural work patterns.
• Carrier mix. UScellular’s relative presence and rural-optimized networks matter more locally than in metro Iowa, and residents are more likely to switch among carriers to match farm-to-highway coverage.
• 5G depth. Low-band 5G reach is reasonable, but mid-band 5G capacity is thinner and more localized than in urban counties, yielding lower average 5G speeds and quicker reversion to LTE when traveling rural roads.
• Spending and devices. Price sensitivity and longer device lifecycles are more common than statewide, and basic/feature phones remain more prevalent among seniors.
• Usage patterns. Practical, reliability-first usage (voice/text, mapping, precision ag apps, weather/radar) is relatively more prominent than high-throughput, on-the-go streaming typical of urban corridors.

Key takeaways

• Expect slightly lower overall smartphone penetration than the Iowa average but higher dependence on cellular as a primary or fallback internet option outside town centers.
• Network experiences vary sharply by micro-location; in-town performance is generally solid, while rural coverage and capacity depend on carrier choice and proximity to corridors.
• Investments that expand mid-band 5G and add rural infill sites would disproportionately improve user experience in Hancock County compared with urban counties that already have dense capacity.

Hancock County, IA — Social Media Snapshot (2025, modeled)

Population context

• Total population: ~10.7k; adults (18+): ~8.4k
• Adults using at least one social platform: ~71% ≈ 6.0k

Most-used platforms among adults (share of all adults; multiple platforms per person)

• YouTube: 80% (6.8k adults)
• Facebook: 72% (6.0k)
• Instagram: 40% (3.4k)
• Pinterest: 32% (2.7k)
• TikTok: 28% (2.4k)
• Snapchat: 28% (2.4k)
• X (Twitter): 18% (1.5k)
• LinkedIn: 18% (1.5k)
• Reddit: 16% (1.3k)
• Nextdoor: 10% (0.8k)

Age profile of the county’s social media users (share of user base; approx.)

• 18–29: ~21% of users; near-universal YouTube; heavy Instagram/Snapchat/TikTok; Facebook secondary
• 30–44: ~27% of users; YouTube and Facebook dominant; strong Instagram; moderate TikTok/Snapchat
• 45–64: ~34% of users; Facebook and YouTube lead; Pinterest meaningful; lighter Instagram/TikTok
• 65+: ~17% of users; Facebook primary; YouTube secondary; limited Instagram/Pinterest; minimal TikTok

Gender breakdown by platform (share of that platform’s users)

• Facebook ~54% women
• Instagram ~56% women
• TikTok ~60% women
• Snapchat ~55% women
• Pinterest ~75% women
• YouTube ~55% men
• X (Twitter) ~60% men
• Reddit ~65% men
• LinkedIn ~52% men

Behavioral trends observed in rural Midwestern counties (applicable to Hancock County)

• Facebook is the community hub: local news, schools, churches, county services, and Marketplace drive frequent daily visits; Groups have high engagement
• YouTube is the go-to for how-to, equipment and home/farm maintenance, product research, and local sports recaps; watch time skews longer than other platforms
• Short-form video is rising: Reels and TikTok see strong passive viewing; creation concentrated in younger cohorts
• Messaging-first usage among under-30: Snapchat and Instagram DMs for coordination; public posting less frequent than private sharing
• Mobile-first behavior: most usage occurs on smartphones; bite-sized content and vertical video outperform links
• Trust/locality matter: posts from known local entities and people outperform brand-only messages; weather, safety alerts, and event-driven updates spike engagement
• Commerce: Facebook Marketplace and local buy/sell groups are the primary digital classifieds; Pinterest influences home, craft, and seasonal purchasing among women 30–64

Method and notes

• Figures are modeled 2025 estimates for Hancock County adults by applying Pew Research Center 2023–2024 U.S. platform usage rates (with rural adjustments) to the county’s age/sex mix from recent ACS; platform counts reflect overlapping use across services.