Kossuth County

Kossuth County, Iowa — key demographics (latest U.S. Census Bureau/ACS estimates)

Population size

• Total population: ~14,600 (2023 estimate)
• 2020 Census: 14,828

Age

• Median age: ~44.7 years
• Under 18: ~22%
• 65 and over: ~24%

Gender

• Female: ~49.6%
• Male: ~50.4%

Racial/ethnic composition

• White alone: ~94.8%
• Black or African American alone: ~0.6%
• American Indian and Alaska Native alone: ~0.2%
• Asian alone: ~0.3%
• Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone: ~0.0%
• Two or more races: ~2.1%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~4.3%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~92%

Households

• Total households: ~6,450
• Average household size: ~2.26 persons
• Family households: ~60%
• Married-couple families: ~50%
• Nonfamily households: ~40%
• One-person households: ~33%
• Households with children under 18: ~24%
• Owner-occupied housing unit rate: ~77%

Insights

• Small, aging population with a high share of residents 65+ and relatively few children.
• Demographically homogeneous; predominantly non-Hispanic White with a small but present Hispanic/Latino population.
• Household sizes are modest, with a substantial share of one-person and nonfamily households, typical of rural counties.

Email usage in Kossuth County, IA

• Population ≈14,700; area 973 sq mi (largest in Iowa); density ≈15 people/sq mi.
• Households with a computer ≈91%; households with a broadband subscription ≈81% (ACS 2018–2022).

Estimated email users: ≈10,000 residents (≈68% of total population; ≈83% of those age 13+), derived from local internet subscription levels and national email adoption (~92% of online adults).

Age distribution of email users (approximate):

• 13–17: 5% (500 users)
• 18–34: 23% (2,300)
• 35–64: 47% (4,700)
• 65+: 25% (2,500)

Gender split: roughly even (~50% female / ~50% male), mirroring county demographics; usage differences by gender are minimal.

Digital access and connectivity:

• Broadband/device access has risen in recent years. Town centers (e.g., Algona, Bancroft) generally have cable/fiber options; lower‑density townships more often depend on DSL or fixed wireless.
• 4G/5G coverage is strong along major corridors; fixed wireless is a common fallback where wired options are limited.
• Email engagement is highest among working‑age adults (35–64); older residents participate widely but at slightly lower rates, shaped by last‑mile availability and affordability.

Mobile phone usage in Kossuth County, Iowa — 2025 summary

Executive snapshot

• Population and geography: 14,828 residents (2020 Census) across 973 square miles — Iowa’s largest county by land area — for a low population density of ~15 people per square mile. This widely dispersed, older-than-average population shapes adoption and network build-out economics.
• Bottom line: Kossuth’s mobile adoption is high but measurably below the Iowa average, with a larger gap among seniors. Coverage is strong in and around Algona and along state highways, while outer townships see more LTE/5G low‑band dependence and capacity constraints. The county shows higher reliance on cellular for home internet than the state overall.

User estimates (unique residents, 2025)

• Any mobile phone: ~12,000 users (about 81% of residents; roughly 93% of residents age 12+).
• Smartphone users: ~10,800 users (about 73% of residents; ~88% of residents age 12+).
• Feature/basic phone users: ~1,200–1,400 (roughly 10–12% of mobile users, concentrated among 65+).

Demographic breakdown of usage (modeled from Census age structure, ACS computer/Internet-use patterns, and rural adoption deltas)

• By age cohort:
  • 12–17: ~800 smartphone users; very near state-level adoption but with slightly higher prepaid share and more data-caps sensitivity.
  • 18–64: ~7,400 smartphone users; bring-your-own-device and multi-line family plans dominate.
  • 65+: ~2,400 smartphone users; smartphone ownership trails the Iowa average by ~5–7 percentage points; a larger share retains basic/feature phones for voice/SMS.
• Socioeconomic factors:
  • Cellular-only home internet: ~11% of households rely primarily on a cellular data plan for home connectivity (vs ~7% statewide), reflecting gaps in affordable wired options outside towns.
  • No home internet subscription: ~10% of households (vs ~7% statewide), with mobile phones used for essential connectivity in many of these households.
• Usage patterns different from Iowa overall:
  • Higher voice/SMS reliance in 65+ and farm households, with lower video-streaming on mobile outside towns due to plan costs and coverage/capacity variability.
  • Slightly lower 5G device penetration than the state average, driven by age mix and slower upgrade cycles.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Technologies in-market:
  • 4G LTE: Countywide baseline from the national carriers; LTE remains the dominant fallback in outer townships and along section roads.
  • 5G:
    • T‑Mobile: Broad low‑band (600 MHz) 5G coverage across most of the county; mid‑band capacity present in/near Algona and along primary corridors.
    • Verizon: Low‑band 5G on key corridors and in towns; C‑band capacity focused in/near Algona and selected sites.
    • AT&T/FirstNet: Low‑band 5G in population centers and along state routes; public‑safety FirstNet coverage prioritized around communities and critical facilities.
  • UScellular operates rural coverage that supplements national carriers in some fringe areas through roaming or direct service.
• Capacity and performance:
  • In/near Algona and along US‑169/US‑18: typical 5G median downstream 60–150 Mbps, with higher peaks on mid‑band sectors.
  • Rural interiors: 5–30 Mbps on LTE/low‑band 5G, with occasional dead zones where tower spacing, terrain, or foliage interfere.
  • Harvest and event peaks: Temporary sector congestion near grain elevators, fairgrounds, and school facilities during evening/sports periods.
• Backhaul and fiber:
  • Fiber backhaul feeds most town-adjacent macro sites via the Iowa Communications Network (ICN) and regional carriers; microwave persists on some rural sites.
  • In-town fiber/coax from local providers supports stronger cellular capacity in Algona and nearby communities; outside towns, fixed wireless is common.
• Public safety and resiliency:
  • Text‑to‑911 is supported; FirstNet Band 14 augments coverage for responders.
  • Ice/wind events can degrade rural sectors; carriers typically deploy generators on primary sites, but prolonged outages can affect outer rings first.

How Kossuth differs from Iowa statewide

• Older population structure yields:
  • Lower smartphone penetration overall (by roughly 3–5 percentage points) and notably lower among seniors (by ~5–7 points).
  • Higher share of feature phones, and slower upgrade cadence to 5G-capable devices.
• Infrastructure and access:
  • Greater dependence on low‑band 5G/LTE in outer areas; more variable indoor coverage in farmsteads and metal buildings.
  • Higher household reliance on cellular data for primary home internet and a slightly higher share with no home internet subscription.
• Usage behavior:
  • Heavier use of voice/SMS and light-data applications compared with video-rich, urban patterns.
  • More prepaid and budget plans relative to postpaid premium tiers; data optimization (Wi‑Fi offload in town, selective streaming) is common.

Market implications

• For carriers: Adding mid‑band 5G in secondary towns and key rural macros would noticeably improve capacity and indoor experiences; targeted in‑building solutions for schools, clinics, and elevators can reduce peak congestion.
• For policymakers and local providers: Extending fiber laterals/backhaul to rural towers and closing last‑mile gaps will reduce the county’s elevated reliance on cellular-only home internet and improve equity for seniors and lower-income households.

Notes on methodology and sources

• Population and geography from the 2020 U.S. Census; adoption and household connectivity modeled from the 2018–2022 ACS computer/Internet-use tables (S2801), Pew Research Center smartphone adoption trends through 2023, rural vs state deltas observed in Iowa counties, and known carrier deployment patterns in rural Iowa through 2024. Figures above are point estimates calibrated to Kossuth’s age distribution and settlement pattern to provide decision-ready, county-specific numbers.

Social media snapshot: Kossuth County, Iowa (2024 best-available estimates)

Topline user stats

• Population: ~14,700 residents
• Social media users: ~10,000 residents (≈68–70% of all residents; ≈80% of adults 18+)
• Daily active users: ~7,000 (roughly 70% of users check at least one platform daily)
• Average platforms used per adult user: ~3

Age mix of social media users

• 13–17: ~8% of county social users
• 18–24: ~10%
• 25–44: ~30%
• 45–64: ~30%
• 65+: ~22% Interpretation: Despite an older county profile, high adoption among 25–64 means most social users are midlife adults, with teens/young adults over-represented on TikTok, Snapchat, and Instagram.

Gender breakdown of social media users

• Women: ~53%
• Men: ~47% Patterns: Women over-index on Facebook and Pinterest; men over-index on YouTube and X/Reddit.

Most-used platforms (adults 18+, share of adult population)

• YouTube: ~76%
• Facebook: ~72%
• Pinterest: ~30%
• Instagram: ~28%
• TikTok: ~18%
• Snapchat: ~16%
• X (Twitter): ~14%
• LinkedIn: ~12%
• WhatsApp: ~10% Notes: Snapchat and TikTok reach is materially higher among 13–24; Facebook Groups and Messenger dominate for older adults.

Behavioral trends

• Facebook-first for local life: Heavy reliance on Groups and Marketplace for community news, school and church updates, buy/sell, and local events. Roughly half of adults check Facebook daily.
• Video habits: YouTube is used for how‑to content, farm/rural equipment tips, hunting/fishing, local sports highlights, and church service archives. Short-form video via Reels is gaining share among 25–44.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger is the default; Snapchat is primary for teens/20s. WhatsApp usage is modest and tends to be niche.
• Shopping and services: Local businesses favor Facebook posts and boosted ads targeted within ~15–25 miles, driving calls, messages, and in‑person visits more than e‑commerce.
• Participation vs creation: Most users are lurkers/sharers rather than frequent original posters; older users share links and community notices, younger users post ephemeral Stories/Snaps.
• Timing: Engagement peaks evenings (7–10 p.m.) and weekends; agricultural seasons can suppress daytime activity.
• Cross-posting: Many organizations cross-post Facebook-to-Instagram; Instagram-native content is concentrated among younger admins and local creators.

Notes on methodology

• Figures are county-level estimates synthesized from the county’s age/sex profile and recent U.S. social platform adoption patterns (Pew Research Center 2023–2024) with rural/age adjustments. Percentages are rounded to reflect local demographics and typical rural usage skews.