Cuyahoga County

Key demographics for Cuyahoga County, Ohio (U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 American Community Survey 1-year):

• Population: ~1.23 million
• Age:
  • Median age: ~41 years
  • Under 18: ~21%
  • 18–64: ~61%
  • 65 and over: ~18%
• Sex:
  • Female: ~52%
  • Male: ~48%
• Race/ethnicity (mutually exclusive):
  • White, non-Hispanic: ~57%
  • Black or African American, non-Hispanic: ~29%
  • Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~7%
  • Asian, non-Hispanic: ~3–4%
  • Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~3%
  • Other, non-Hispanic: <1%
• Households:
  • Total households: ~530,000
  • Average household size: ~2.27
  • Family households: ~58% of households (avg. family size ~3.0)
  • Households with children under 18: ~25%
  • Living alone: ~34%
  • Owner-occupied housing rate: ~59%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 ACS 1-year (tables DP05, S0101, S1101, DP04). Figures rounded for clarity.

Cuyahoga County, OH — email usage snapshot (estimates)

• Estimated email users: ~0.9–1.0 million adults. Method: ~1.23M residents with ~78% adults; ~92% of adults online and ~95% of online adults use email (Pew/NTIA), yielding ≈0.9–1.0M.
• Age profile (penetration among adults):
  • 18–29: ~97–99%
  • 30–49: ~97–99%
  • 50–64: ~92–95%
  • 65+: ~80–88% County skews older than the U.S. average, so a sizable share of users are 50+.
• Gender split: ~50/50; differences are negligible (within 1–2 percentage points in surveys).
• Digital access trends:
  • Home broadband subscription ~84–86% of households (ACS), with adoption gaps concentrated in parts of Cleveland.
  • Smartphone-only internet: ~13–16% of households.
  • No home internet: roughly 10–12%; device access and affordability are key barriers.
  • Public libraries and local programs (e.g., hotspot lending, low-cost service) help mitigate gaps; ACP wind-down in 2024 may pressure affordability.
• Local density/connectivity facts:
  • Population density ≈2,700 people/sq mi; largely urban/suburban.
  • Fixed broadband availability exceeds 95% of locations (FCC maps), with multiple providers in the urban core; adoption, not availability, is the main constraint in lower-income neighborhoods.

Below is a concise, decision-useful snapshot of mobile phone usage in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, with emphasis on how local patterns differ from statewide norms. Headline user estimates

• Adult smartphone users: roughly 0.84–0.88 million people (about 87–91% of adults), out of ~0.95–1.0 million adults in a county of ~1.22 million residents.
• Households with a smartphone: about 490k–505k of ~540k–560k total households (≈88–92%).
• Smartphone-only internet households (cellular data without a wireline plan): about 16–20% countywide, higher than Ohio overall (≈12–14%).
• Households with no home internet subscription: roughly 10–12% in the county vs ~8–9% statewide; most of this local gap is concentrated in the City of Cleveland.

Demographic breakdown (how Cuyahoga differs from Ohio)

• Income:
  • Under $25k: much higher smartphone-only reliance (≈30–40% of low‑income households), reflecting affordability barriers to wireline plans and equipment. This share is several points above Ohio’s low‑income average.
  • $75k+: very low smartphone-only (typically <8%); parity with or slightly better than state averages.
• Race/ethnicity:
  • Black and Hispanic households in Cuyahoga show notably higher smartphone-only and lower wireline adoption than White households, with gaps larger than the statewide racial gaps. Smartphone-only among Black and Hispanic households often lands in the mid‑20s to high‑20s percent range, versus low‑ to mid‑teens for White households.
• Age:
  • Seniors (65+): smartphone adoption trails younger cohorts as everywhere, but Cuyahoga’s senior smartphone adoption is slightly lower than Ohio’s average, with a higher share of seniors relying on basic phones or caregiver devices. Where seniors do have data plans, they are more likely to be smartphone‑only than similarly aged Ohioans, due to affordability/availability of wireline in certain neighborhoods.
• Geography within the county:
  • City of Cleveland vs suburbs: Cleveland shows a much higher smartphone-only rate and lower wireline subscription than suburban cities (e.g., Lakewood, Parma, Cleveland Heights). This intra‑county divide is steeper than the urban–nonurban gap seen in Ohio broadly, where rural availability drives many gaps. In Cuyahoga, the limiting factor is primarily affordability and housing stock, not network availability.

Usage patterns distinct from state-level

• Greater mobile substitution: Residents are more likely than the Ohio average to use smartphones as their primary or only internet access, including for homework, job search, telehealth, and streaming.
• Higher prepaid and hotspot reliance: Prepaid plans and mobile hotspot use are more common than statewide, particularly in Cleveland neighborhoods, due to cost control and credit barriers.
• App-centric engagement: Higher rates of app‑based banking, benefits management, and telehealth among smartphone‑only users, but also higher data‑cap sensitivity and throttling issues.

Digital infrastructure notes

• 4G/5G coverage:
  • All three national carriers have strong 4G LTE and widespread 5G mid‑band in the county; operator-reported coverage is effectively countywide. Mid‑band “5G UC/UWB” is common across most populated areas; mmWave nodes are concentrated downtown (stadiums, hospitals, campuses, event venues).
  • Compared with Ohio overall, Cuyahoga’s 5G availability is earlier and denser, reflecting urban deployment priorities; capacity, not coverage, is the binding constraint in busy corridors.
• Capacity hot spots and weak spots:
  • Heavy demand zones: downtown/Flats, University Circle/health district, I‑90/I‑71/I‑77 corridors, and CLE airport. Networks are generally adequate but can congest during events and peak commute.
  • Variable/weak pockets: parts of the Cuyahoga River valley and edges of the Metroparks/CVNP corridors where terrain and foliage attenuate signal; certain older high‑rise buildings with RF attenuation. These issues are less about statewide rural gaps and more about local topography and building stock.
• Wireline context that drives mobile reliance:
  • The county has ample cable/DSL/fiber in suburbs, but the City of Cleveland has neighborhoods with limited fiber penetration and legacy wiring in multi‑unit buildings; installation fees, deposits, and equipment costs remain barriers. This differs from Ohio’s broader challenge where rural availability is the main constraint.
• Public and nonprofit initiatives:
  • Active digital equity efforts (e.g., county/city ARPA-funded programs, device/skills training, and nonprofit fixed‑wireless such as DigitalC) specifically target affordability and adoption. The 2024 wind‑down of the federal ACP increased pressure on mobile substitution locally more than in many Ohio counties.

What this means

• Compared with the Ohio average, Cuyahoga County is more “mobile-first”: higher smartphone-only households, greater prepaid use, and sharper income/race adoption gaps. The issue is less about cellular coverage and more about affordability and building-level wireline constraints in the urban core.
• For service planning, assume strong 5G availability but prioritize capacity, indoor coverage solutions, and affordable plans/devices; for digital inclusion, pair low-cost home broadband offers with device support and building retrofits to reduce smartphone-only dependence.

Below is a concise, county-focused snapshot using the best available public benchmarks. Because platform publishers and Pew do not release county-level cuts, percentages are modeled by applying current U.S. adult usage rates to Cuyahoga County’s adult population and age mix from recent ACS data. Treat figures as directional estimates.

Overall user stats

• Adult population: roughly 1.0 million (of ~1.23–1.25M residents)
• Adults using at least one social platform: about 70–75% ≈ 700k–750k
• Multi-platform behavior: most adults use several platforms; younger adults use the most, older adults fewer

Most-used platforms (estimated share of adults in Cuyahoga County)

• YouTube: ~83%
• Facebook: ~68%
• Instagram: ~47%
• Pinterest: ~35%
• LinkedIn: ~30%
• TikTok: ~33%
• WhatsApp: ~29%
• Snapchat: ~27%
• X (Twitter): ~22%
• Reddit: ~22%
• Nextdoor: ~19% (likely higher in the suburbs than in the city proper)

Age groups (local mix ≈ 18–29: ~20%; 30–49: ~33%; 50–64: ~27%; 65+: ~20%)

• 18–29: Near-universal social use; heavy on YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat. Low Facebook reliance for content, but still used for events/groups.
• 30–49: Highest multi-platform use; Facebook and YouTube dominant, Instagram strong; growing TikTok; WhatsApp and LinkedIn common for work and community coordination.
• 50–64: Facebook and YouTube lead; Pinterest meaningful (shopping, home, recipes); TikTok adoption rising but still secondary.
• 65+: Facebook and YouTube dominate; Nextdoor usage concentrates in suburban neighborhoods; platform count per user is lowest but engagement in local/community groups is high.

Gender breakdown (directional, reflecting U.S. patterns applied locally)

• Overall user base slightly female-skewed (county population is ~52% female).
• Women over-index on Facebook, Instagram, and especially Pinterest (women ~50% vs men ~18% use Pinterest nationally).
• Men over-index on YouTube, Reddit, and X/Twitter.
• LinkedIn and WhatsApp show relatively balanced gender splits.

Behavioral trends to know (locally relevant)

• Local news and neighborhoods: Strong activity in Facebook Groups and Nextdoor for municipal updates, schools, public safety, and neighborhood services; city of Cleveland and suburbs use Facebook/X for alerts.
• Sports-driven spikes: Browns, Cavs, and Guardians game days drive sharp engagement on X, Reddit, YouTube, and team/fan Facebook Groups; short-form highlights spread on Instagram Reels/TikTok.
• Local discovery: Instagram and TikTok are key for restaurants, bars, arts, and events (Ohio City, Tremont, Downtown, Waterloo, AsiaTown). Reels/TikTok perform well for “what to do this weekend,” openings, and food content.
• Community and culture: Facebook Groups and WhatsApp are common for churches, mutual aid, ethnic and language communities, and school/league coordination.
• Digital access patterns: Some city neighborhoods have lower home broadband adoption, so mobile-first behaviors and short-form video are especially important for reach.
• Civic/seasonal: Winter weather and election cycles increase engagement with local news pages, city services, and neighborhood groups.

Sources and method

• Pew Research Center, Social Media Use in 2024 (platform reach by U.S. adults; age/gender skews).
• U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS) 1-year/5-year for Cuyahoga County (population, age, sex). Percentages above are modeled by applying national usage rates to local demographics.