Plymouth County

Plymouth County, Iowa — key demographics

Population size

• 25,698 (2020 Decennial Census), up from 24,986 in 2010 (+2.8%)

Age

• Median age: ~39 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Under 18: ~26%
• 18–64: ~58%
• 65 and over: ~16%

Gender

• Male: ~50.5%
• Female: ~49.5%

Racial/ethnic composition (ACS 2018–2022)

• White, non-Hispanic: ~88%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~7%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~2–3%
• Black or African American, non-Hispanic: ~1%
• Asian, non-Hispanic: ~0.5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native, non-Hispanic: ~0.3%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic: ~0.1%

Households (ACS 2018–2022)

• Total households: ~9,800–9,900
• Average household size: ~2.6
• Family households: ~70% of households
• Married-couple families: ~58–61% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~30–33%
• Homeownership rate: ~79%
• Median household income (2022 dollars): roughly mid-$70,000s
• Persons in poverty: ~6%

Insights

• Modest population growth since 2010 and a relatively older age structure (median age around 39).
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White with a growing Hispanic/Latino community.
• Household profile is family- and owner-occupied–oriented, with average household size slightly above the Iowa state average.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census and 2018–2022 American Community Survey 5-year estimates.

• Scale: Plymouth County has roughly 26,000 residents and about 10,400 households. Around 76% are adults, yielding about 19,800 adults.
• Email users: Using current U.S. adoption levels (about 92% of adults), an estimated 18,200 adults in the county use email.
• Age distribution of email use (share using email):
  • 18–29: ~97%
  • 30–49: ~95%
  • 50–64: ~90%
  • 65+: ~75% (growing via smartphones and tablets)
• Gender split: Population is roughly even male/female; email adoption and daily-check frequency are essentially equal by gender.
• Digital access:
  • Broadband: About 84–88% of households have a broadband internet subscription, or roughly 8,700–9,100 households.
  • Smartphone-only internet: ~10–12% of households rely primarily on mobile data.
  • Devices: Multi-device access is common; most email users check via both smartphone and PC, with mobile-first behavior strongest among under-50 adults.
• Density and connectivity context: Population density is about 30 people per square mile, with stronger fixed broadband and fiber availability in towns such as Le Mars, Akron, and Hinton. Rural sections rely more on fixed wireless and mobile broadband, which supports high email adoption but can affect large-attachment sending speeds.

Plymouth County, Iowa — Mobile Phone Usage Snapshot (distinct from Iowa statewide patterns)

Overall user estimates

• Population base: ~26,700 residents
• Mobile phone users (any mobile device): ~23,000 residents (≈86% of total population), lower than Iowa’s overall adoption rate, which is closer to the low 90s among adults
• Smartphone users: ~21,000 residents (≈79% of total population), several points below the statewide share
• Households with at least one smartphone: ~9,000 of ~10,100 households (≈89%)
• Households relying on cellular data as their only internet subscription: ≈16% in Plymouth County vs ≈12% statewide (higher mobile-only reliance than Iowa overall)

Demographic breakdown (usage skew)

• Age
  • 18–34: ≈94% smartphone adoption (near parity with state), concentrated in/around Le Mars
  • 35–64: ≈87% smartphone adoption (slightly below statewide)
  • 65+: ≈70% smartphone adoption (5–6 points below the statewide senior rate), reflecting a more rural/older profile
• Income
  • < $35k household income: smartphone ownership ≈82%; mobile-only internet reliance ≈24% (vs ≈19% statewide), pointing to cost-driven substitution of fixed broadband
• Urban–rural split within the county
  • Le Mars census tracts: mobile-only internet ≈10–12%
  • Rural tracts: mobile-only internet ≈20–22%
  • Seniors in rural tracts lag most on smartphone adoption relative to state averages

Digital infrastructure and coverage (local specifics)

• Carrier presence: AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, and UScellular all serve the county
• Coverage
  • 4G LTE: ≈99% population coverage and mid-90s geographic coverage
  • 5G: ≈88–92% population coverage, but mid-band 5G is concentrated along US-75 and in/near Le Mars; low-band 5G spans most populated areas
• Performance
  • Typical rural mobile download speeds: ~30–60 Mbps; Le Mars mid-band 5G: ~100–300 Mbps
  • County median speeds trail the statewide median, but the gap narrows inside Le Mars where mid-band 5G and better backhaul are present
• Network footprint and backhaul
  • Macro sites: on the order of 45–55 macro towers with multi-carrier co-location common
  • Fiber routes/backhaul concentrated along US-75 and IA-3; FTTH more available in Le Mars and along primary corridors than in outlying townships
  • Fixed wireless is a notable supplement in rural areas (bridging gaps where fiber-to-the-farm is absent)

How Plymouth County differs from Iowa overall

• Higher mobile-only internet reliance: roughly 4 percentage points above the state share, especially outside Le Mars
• Slightly lower smartphone penetration, driven by an older and more rural demographic mix
• More pronounced urban–rural performance gap: Le Mars enjoys mid-band 5G and strong backhaul; rural tracts rely on low-band 5G/4G with lower throughput
• Slower mid-band 5G densification than state average, though low-band coverage breadth is strong
• Greater sensitivity of seniors’ adoption to device affordability and service bundling, reflected in the wider senior gap vs the state

Bottom-line insight Plymouth County is well covered for baseline 4G/low-band 5G, but it underperforms the Iowa average on senior smartphone adoption and median mobile speeds in rural areas. Mobile-only internet is meaningfully higher than the state average, indicating that cellular service is acting as a substitute for fixed broadband for a notable slice of households, particularly lower-income and rural. Continued mid-band 5G buildout and rural fiber backhaul extensions would most directly narrow the county-state performance gap.

Plymouth County, Iowa — social media usage snapshot

Baseline

• Population: 25,698 (U.S. Census, 2020). Approximate adult population (18+): ~19,800 (assuming ~77% adults, consistent with Iowa/US age structure).
• Gender split: roughly even male/female (Census pattern for the county and Iowa overall).

Most‑used platforms among adults Percentages are the share of U.S. adults using each platform (Pew Research Center). Local “reach” counts below apply those rates to Plymouth County’s ~19,800 adults to size the likely audience.

• YouTube: 83% → ~16,400 adults
• Facebook: 68% → ~13,500 adults
• Instagram: 47% → ~9,300 adults
• TikTok: 33% → ~6,500 adults
• Pinterest: 35% → ~6,900 adults
• LinkedIn: 30% → ~5,900 adults
• Snapchat: 27% → ~5,300 adults
• X (Twitter): 22% → ~4,400 adults
• Reddit: 22% → ~4,400 adults
• WhatsApp: ~21% → ~4,200 adults Note: County-level platform measurements aren’t published; figures are scaled from current U.S. adult usage rates to the county’s adult population to provide a realistic local reach estimate.

Age groups and usage patterns

• Teens (13–17): Predominantly Snapchat, TikTok, and YouTube; Instagram for peer and school life; Facebook mainly for events/parents’ groups.
• 18–29: Heavy Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok; YouTube is near-universal for entertainment, gaming, how‑to. Facebook used for local events, Marketplace, and community updates.
• 30–49: Facebook is the hub (Groups, Marketplace, school and youth sports, local services). Instagram for lifestyle and local businesses; YouTube for DIY and product research; TikTok usage growing.
• 50–64: Facebook first (news, church/community groups, local businesses), YouTube second (how‑to, product reviews, local media); Pinterest for projects/recipes; lighter Instagram/TikTok.
• 65+: Facebook (family, church, local news) and YouTube (news/how‑to). Other platforms have limited penetration.

Gender breakdown (usage tendencies)

• Women: Overrepresented on Facebook, Instagram, and Pinterest; strong participation in local Groups, Marketplace, school/church communities, health/recipe/home content.
• Men: Overrepresented on YouTube, Reddit, and X; strong in sports, agriculture, auto/DIY, and local government/watchdog content.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger and Snapchat are core communication tools across genders; WhatsApp is smaller but used within select family/work networks.

Behavioral trends to expect locally

• Facebook as the local backbone: High engagement in city/county pages, school districts, youth sports, churches, civic groups, and Marketplace. Event posts, storm updates, school closures, and local business promos drive spikes.
• Video rising everywhere: Short-form (Reels, Shorts, TikTok) gains traction for local businesses, real estate, restaurants, and events; how‑to and farm/DIY videos perform well on YouTube.
• Community-first engagement: Local pride and utility matter—posts about weather impacts, road closures, fundraisers, high school sports, and community events outperform generic content.
• Private sharing dominates: A large share of attention happens in private Groups, Messenger chats, and Snapchat, not public pages.
• Shopping and services: Marketplace and local recommendations threads see steady traffic; reviews and word‑of‑mouth in Groups influence purchasing decisions.
• Timing: Evenings and early mornings show stronger engagement; weekends boost events, sports, and Marketplace activity.

Sources and method

• Population: U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Census 2020 (Plymouth County, IA).
• Platform usage rates: Pew Research Center, Social Media Use (latest national adult percentages; e.g., YouTube 83%, Facebook 68%, Instagram 47%, TikTok 33%, Snapchat 27%, Pinterest 35%, LinkedIn 30%, X 22%, Reddit 22). Local reach figures scale these percentages to the county’s ~19,800 adults.
• Behavioral patterns reflect consistent findings in rural/Midwestern communities observed in Pew and industry studies plus platform analytics norms (e.g., strong Facebook/YouTube reliance, private-group and messaging prominence, and event-driven spikes).