Van Wert County Local Demographic Profile
Van Wert County, Ohio – key demographics (latest available from U.S. Census Bureau: 2023 Population Estimates; 2019–2023 ACS 5-year)
Population
- Total population: ~28,500 (2023 estimate)
- 2020 Census: 28,931
Age
- Median age: ~41.7 years
- Under 18: ~22–23%
- 65 and over: ~19–20%
Sex
- Female: ~50–51%
- Male: ~49–50%
Race and ethnicity
- White alone: ~92–94%
- Black or African American alone: ~1–2%
- Asian alone: ~0.3–0.5%
- American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~0.2%
- Some other race alone: ~1%
- Two or more races: ~3–4%
- Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~3–4% Note: Hispanic/Latino is an ethnicity and overlaps with race categories.
Households
- Households: ~11,300–11,600
- Average household size: ~2.45–2.50
- Family households: ~68%
- Married-couple families: ~50–53%
- Nonfamily households: ~32%
- Homeownership rate: ~73–76%
Insights
- Population is stable to slightly declining since 2010.
- Age profile is modestly older than the U.S. average, with roughly one-fifth age 65+.
- Household sizes are slightly below the U.S. average; owner-occupancy is high for a rural county.
- Racial/ethnic composition is predominantly non-Hispanic White with a small but present Hispanic/Latino community.
Email Usage in Van Wert County
Email usage snapshot: Van Wert County, Ohio
- Population and density: ~28,900 residents; ~71 people per square mile (rural profile).
- Estimated email users: ~20,500 residents (≈71% of total population; ≈92% of adults).
- Age distribution of email users (est.):
- 18–34: ~5,100 (≈25%)
- 35–64: ~10,700 (≈52%)
- 65+: ~4,700 (≈23%)
- Gender split of email users (est., aligns with county demographics): ≈51% female, ≈49% male.
- Digital access and connectivity:
- Household broadband subscription: ≈84% (ACS 5‑year), slightly below Ohio’s average (~87%), reflecting rural density.
- Offline gap: ≈10–12% of households lack home internet, contributing to lower email adoption among seniors and in the most rural tracts.
- Access trend: steady multi‑year increases in broadband subscriptions and device ownership, with expanding cable/fiber in the city of Van Wert and along major corridors; remaining gaps persist on rural edges where fixed‑wireline choices are limited and cellular is primary.
Insights: Email is near‑universal among working‑age adults; the main constraints are rural last‑mile availability and lower adoption among 65+, not overall interest. As infrastructure expands, email penetration should continue edging upward, especially among older residents.
Mobile Phone Usage in Van Wert County
Summary: Mobile phone usage in Van Wert County, Ohio
Baseline and user estimates
- Population and households: Approximately 28,900 residents and ~11,500 households (2020–2023 estimates; U.S. Census/ACS).
- Mobile phone users: 24,000–25,000 people (about 83–86% of residents) actively use a mobile handset. This includes an estimated 23,000 smartphone users (roughly 79–81% of the total population), plus ~1,000–1,500 feature‑phone users. Estimates synthesize local age structure with Pew Research’s 2023 rural ownership rates.
- Household adoption: About 10,200–10,400 households (88–91%) have at least one smartphone/data plan. Cellular‑only home internet reliance is elevated at an estimated 17–20% of households versus roughly 12–14% statewide (ACS S2801 patterns for rural Ohio; five‑year estimates).
Demographic breakdown (how Van Wert differs from Ohio overall)
- Age:
- Adults overall with a smartphone: ~83–86% in Van Wert vs ~88–90% statewide (Pew 2023; rural gap).
- 18–29: ~95–97% (near parity with state).
- 30–49: ~93–96% (near parity).
- 50–64: ~85–90% (2–4 points lower than Ohio).
- 65+: ~68–73% (notably below Ohio’s ~75–80%), reflecting a larger senior share locally.
- Implication: A modestly higher share (about 3–5%) of basic‑phone users remains among older adults compared with the state average.
- Income and education:
- Median household income trails the Ohio median, and smartphone‑only internet dependency is correspondingly higher. Expect 18–22% of lower‑income households to rely on mobile plans as their primary or sole home internet, vs ~14–16% in Ohio overall.
- Prepaid plan usage is higher: roughly 28–32% of lines in the county vs ~22–26% statewide, driven by price sensitivity and credit‑screening effects common in rural markets.
- Families with children:
- Among teens, smartphone adoption is near universal (~92–96%), but device replacement cycles are longer than in metro Ohio, and shared/family plans are more prevalent.
- Work patterns:
- Shift and field‑based work (agriculture, manufacturing, logistics along US‑30) drive heavier weekday daytime mobile data usage outside typical 9–5 peaks compared with state urban centers.
Digital infrastructure and performance
- Coverage and technology mix:
- All three national carriers provide 4G LTE countywide coverage along primary corridors and population centers. 5G low‑band coverage (sub‑1 GHz) is broadly available; mid‑band 5G (2.5 GHz/C‑band) is present in and around the City of Van Wert, with nodes concentrated along US‑30 and near town centers. This mid‑band footprint is sparser than in Ohio’s larger metros, which lowers typical countywide 5G speeds and indoor performance versus the state median.
- AT&T’s FirstNet Band 14 presence along major routes and in population centers enhances public‑safety and rural coverage reliability.
- Performance:
- Typical user speeds: roughly 40–120 Mbps down / 5–20 Mbps up in population centers; 10–40 Mbps down on rural edges. The statewide mobile median (especially around larger metros) runs higher due to denser mid‑band deployments.
- Indoor coverage remains inconsistent in metal‑roof farm structures and in low‑tower‑density areas near the Indiana line, where external antennas or boosters are commonly used.
- Cross‑border dynamics:
- Proximity to Fort Wayne, IN market influences tower siting and optimization; edge areas may preferentially connect to Indiana‑sited cells. This dynamic is more pronounced here than for most Ohio counties.
- 5G home internet:
- Fixed‑wireless access (FWA) via 5G is available in and around Van Wert and along US‑30. Adoption rates are higher than the Ohio average in fringe/suburban and rural blocks, reflecting limited fiber availability and price sensitivity. This bolsters the county’s higher cellular‑only home internet share.
- Wireline context that shapes mobile dependence:
- Fiber is clustered in the city and select subdivisions; many rural households rely on cable, DSL, or WISPs. Where wireline options are slow or costly, residents lean into unlimited mobile plans and FWA, materially more than the state as a whole.
Usage patterns and plan economics
- Data consumption:
- Average smartphone data use is estimated around 20–25 GB per month, in line with North America trends (Ericsson Mobility Report) and pushed upward locally by smartphone‑only households and FWA substitution. This sits slightly above Ohio’s overall average due to greater home‑internet substitution.
- Plan mix:
- Unlimited smartphone plans dominate among heavy users and FWA adopters; prepaid and limited‑data plans remain more common than statewide for light users and seniors.
- Device mix:
- Smartphones exceed 94% of active handsets; feature phones persist among some seniors and in ultra‑basic work lines.
Key takeaways: how Van Wert County differs from Ohio
- Slightly lower overall adult smartphone ownership and notably lower 65+ adoption.
- Higher dependence on cellular as the primary home connection (by ~4–6 percentage points).
- Greater prepaid share and longer device replacement cycles.
- Sparser mid‑band 5G and more pronounced edge/roaming effects near the Indiana border, yielding lower typical speeds and more variable indoor coverage than the state median.
- Faster pickup of 5G fixed‑wireless home internet relative to fiber‑light rural tracts, increasing mobile network load more than in most Ohio counties.
Sources and methodology
- Population, households, and age structure: U.S. Census Bureau/ACS (latest available county and five‑year estimates).
- Ownership and dependency patterns: Pew Research Center (2023 smartphone adoption by geography and age), ACS S2801 (smartphone/cellular‑only subscription tendencies for rural Ohio), CTIA/North America usage trends, Ericsson Mobility Report (regional monthly data use).
- Coverage characterization: Carrier public coverage disclosures and FCC mobile availability patterns for rural Ohio counties; localized adjustments based on corridor/town siting and cross‑border market effects.
Social Media Trends in Van Wert County
Van Wert County, OH — Social media usage snapshot (2025)
Population context
- Residents: ~28,900 (U.S. Census)
- Residents age 13+: ~24,900
Overall usage
- Monthly social media users: 19,500–21,000 (78–84% of residents 13+)
- Daily users: 14,000–15,500 (56–62% of residents 13+)
- Multi‑platform behavior: ~55–60% of users are active on 3+ platforms
Most‑used platforms (share of residents 13+ using monthly; approx. user counts in parentheses)
- YouTube: 72–76% (≈17.9k–18.9k)
- Facebook: 61–66% (≈15.2k–16.4k)
- Instagram: 34–39% (≈8.5k–9.7k)
- TikTok: 29–35% (≈7.2k–8.7k)
- Snapchat: 26–32% (≈6.5k–8.0k)
- Pinterest: 28–33% (≈7.0k–8.2k)
- LinkedIn: 14–19% (≈3.5k–4.7k)
- X (Twitter): 12–16% (≈3.0k–4.0k)
- Reddit: 11–15% (≈2.7k–3.7k)
- WhatsApp: 10–13% (≈2.5k–3.2k)
- Nextdoor: 4–7% (≈1.0k–1.7k)
Age profile (share using at least one social platform)
- 13–17: 95–98% (dominant: Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube)
- 18–29: 92–96% (Instagram, TikTok, YouTube; Snapchat strong)
- 30–49: 84–88% (Facebook, Instagram, YouTube)
- 50–64: 72–78% (Facebook, YouTube)
- 65+: 48–55% (Facebook, YouTube)
Gender breakdown among social media users
- Female: 53–55% (higher engagement on Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest)
- Male: 45–47% (higher on YouTube, Reddit, X)
Behavioral trends
- Facebook is the community hub: local news/schools, churches, civic groups; Marketplace is heavily used (vehicles, lawn/farm equipment, furniture) with weekend listing spikes.
- Short‑form video (Reels/TikTok/Shorts) drives discovery; best‑performing content features local faces/places, high‑school sports clips, how‑to/DIY, and event coverage.
- Messaging is central: Facebook Messenger and Snapchat for friends/family; Instagram DMs for creator/business outreach and customer queries.
- Event‑driven surges around the Van Wert County Fair, high‑school sports seasons, severe weather, and road closures; posts tied to these events see above‑average reach and shares.
- Prime engagement windows: 6–8 a.m., 11:30 a.m.–1 p.m., and 7–10 p.m.; Sunday evenings and weeknights outperform weekday mornings.
- Trust dynamics: local endorsements and proof‑of‑work posts (before/after, testimonials) outperform polished ads; comment threads and shares function as social proof.
- Shopping/response behavior: preference for local pickup and cash/P2P payments; limited‑time offers and clear call‑to‑action posts generate higher message clicks and saves than evergreen promos.
Notes on method
- Percentages are county‑level estimates built from Pew Research Center Social Media Use (2024) platform adoption by age/gender, applied to Van Wert County’s age structure (U.S. Census/ACS), with adjustments for rural Midwest usage patterns.
Table of Contents
Other Counties in Ohio
- Adams
- Allen
- Ashland
- Ashtabula
- Athens
- Auglaize
- Belmont
- Brown
- Butler
- Carroll
- Champaign
- Clark
- Clermont
- Clinton
- Columbiana
- Coshocton
- Crawford
- Cuyahoga
- Darke
- Defiance
- Delaware
- Erie
- Fairfield
- Fayette
- Franklin
- Fulton
- Gallia
- Geauga
- Greene
- Guernsey
- Hamilton
- Hancock
- Hardin
- Harrison
- Henry
- Highland
- Hocking
- Holmes
- Huron
- Jackson
- Jefferson
- Knox
- Lake
- Lawrence
- Licking
- Logan
- Lorain
- Lucas
- Madison
- Mahoning
- Marion
- Medina
- Meigs
- Mercer
- Miami
- Monroe
- Montgomery
- Morgan
- Morrow
- Muskingum
- Noble
- Ottawa
- Paulding
- Perry
- Pickaway
- Pike
- Portage
- Preble
- Putnam
- Richland
- Ross
- Sandusky
- Scioto
- Seneca
- Shelby
- Stark
- Summit
- Trumbull
- Tuscarawas
- Union
- Vinton
- Warren
- Washington
- Wayne
- Williams
- Wood
- Wyandot