Washington County

Washington County, Vermont – Key demographics

Population size

• 59,807 (2020 Census)

Age (ACS 2018–2022)

• Under 5 years: 4.7%
• Under 18 years: 19.6%
• 65 years and over: 20.9%
• Median age: ~43 years

Gender (ACS 2018–2022)

• Female: 50.8%
• Male: 49.2%

Racial/ethnic composition (ACS 2018–2022)

• White alone: 94.2%
• Black or African American alone: 1.2%
• American Indian and Alaska Native alone: 0.5%
• Asian alone: 1.2%
• Two or more races: 2.8%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): 2.3%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: 92.4%

Household data (ACS 2018–2022)

• Households: 25,592
• Persons per household: 2.23
• Family households: ~58% of households
• Married-couple households: ~46% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~25%
• Owner-occupied housing unit rate: 73.4%
• Median household income (2022 dollars): $78,900
• Persons in poverty: 8.9%

Insights

• Older age profile (21% 65+) and small household size reflect Vermont’s statewide trends.
• Population is predominantly White with modest racial/ethnic diversity.
• High homeownership and moderate median income; poverty rate below the U.S. average.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2018–2022 American Community Survey 5‑year estimates).

Washington County, VT (about 60,000 residents; about 86 per sq mi)

• Estimated email users: about 47,000 residents (about 92% of adults; about 78% of total population).
• Age pattern (usage rates): 12-17: 85-90%; 18-29: ~97%; 30-49: ~95%; 50-64: ~90%; 65+: 75-80%. With a relatively older profile (median age about 45; about 20% 65+), seniors make up a sizable share of non-users.
• Gender split among users: roughly 51% women, 49% men; usage rates are essentially equal by gender.
• Digital access and trends: About 92% of households have a computer and roughly 82% subscribe to a broadband service (ACS), leaving about 10% without a home subscription. Connectivity is densest in the Montpelier-Barre area; rural hill towns see slower speeds and lower adoption. CVFiber’s ongoing fiber-to-the-premise build since 2022 is expanding gigabit availability countywide, expected to lift email use further.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Washington County, Vermont

Scope and headline estimates

• Population baseline: 59,807 (2020 Census). Adults (18+): approximately 47,000.
• Mobile phone users: 45,000–46,000 adults (about 95–97% of adults), in line with national “any cellphone” ownership but modestly above the Vermont average due to the Barre–Montpelier urban core and the I-89 corridor.
• Smartphone users: 41,000–43,000 adults (about 88–92% of adults). This skews slightly higher than the statewide average, which is tempered by Vermont’s older age structure and more rural mix.

How Washington County differs from Vermont overall

• Adoption level: Slightly higher smartphone penetration than the statewide average, driven by two small cities (Barre and Montpelier), denser employment centers (state government complex), and better in-county transport corridors (I-89, US-2).
• Network availability: More consistent LTE and practical 5G access in the Barre–Montpelier area and along I-89 than in many rural Vermont counties. Fewer complete dead zones than the statewide rural norm, though gaps remain in hill-town terrain.
• Speeds and capacity: Median 5G performance in the urban core and along I-89 is typically higher than Vermont’s rural median due to mid-band 5G deployments and denser site grids; off-corridor areas quickly revert to LTE with lower and more variable speeds than state-corridor averages.
• Smartphone-only households: A bit lower than the Vermont average because the county is a focus of active fiber-to-the-home buildouts (notably CVFiber), which reduces reliance on phones as a primary home internet connection compared with many rural counties.

Demographic breakdown of usage patterns

• Age
  • 18–29: Near-universal smartphone ownership (≈97–99%); heavy app/data usage; high dependence on 5G where available.
  • 30–64: Very high ownership (≈92–96%); strong use of productivity, navigation, and messaging; widespread use of mobile hotspotting during outages.
  • 65+: Lower but steadily rising smartphone ownership (≈75–82%); heavier reliance on voice, text, and a small set of apps; more frequent use of Wi‑Fi calling due to indoor signal challenges in older housing stock.
• Income and employment
  • Government, healthcare, and education workers (concentrated in Montpelier/Barre) show high postpaid adoption and employer-subsidized plans, pushing the county slightly above the state’s share of postpaid lines.
  • Lower-income and more rural households are more likely to use prepaid/MVNO plans, but the county’s prepaid share remains a bit below the Vermont average thanks to better coverage and device-financing access in the urban core.
• Urban vs. rural within the county
  • Barre/Montpelier: Highest 5G availability and fastest median speeds; greater use of video streaming, ride/navigation, and contactless payments.
  • Hill towns (e.g., Calais, Woodbury, Marshfield, Roxbury): More LTE-only coverage, greater use of signal boosters and Wi‑Fi calling, and higher sensitivity to weather-related outages.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Carriers present: Verizon, AT&T, and T‑Mobile operate countywide, with MVNOs riding these networks widely available.
• Coverage tiers
  • 5G: Most reliable in the Barre–Montpelier area and along I‑89; T‑Mobile typically offers the broadest mid‑band footprint, with Verizon and AT&T providing a mix of mid‑band (select sites) and low‑band coverage. Outside corridors, 5G often falls back to LTE.
  • LTE: Countywide baseline, with persistent weak spots in mountainous/forested pockets and along lesser-traveled roads.
• Typical performance (real-world user experience)
  • 5G mid‑band (urban core, interstate corridor): roughly 150–400 Mbps down, 10–40 Mbps up, low-to-moderate latency.
  • 5G low‑band and LTE (rural/hill towns): roughly 5–50 Mbps down, 2–10 Mbps up, higher latency and more variability.
• Backhaul and resilience
  • Ongoing fiber expansion via the Central Vermont Internet (CVFiber) Communications Union District is improving backhaul to towers and public facilities, leading to better capacity and faster restoration after storms compared with more remote Vermont counties.
  • Emergency communications: E911 coverage and Wireless Emergency Alerts are robust in population centers; rural indoor coverage is bolstered by Wi‑Fi calling adoption.
• Notable gaps and reliability factors
  • Terrain-driven shadows persist in valleys and dense forest areas away from I‑89 and the Barre–Montpelier basin.
  • Winter storms and spring floods can still cause localized mobile service degradation, but restoration times tend to be shorter than the statewide rural average due to denser plant and prioritization around the state capital.

Behavioral and usage insights

• Daytime population swell from commuters and government operations raises weekday demand in Montpelier and Barre; networks are engineered for these peaks, which is less common in Vermont’s purely rural counties.
• High reliance on navigation, messaging, and push email among public-sector and healthcare workers supports heavier mid-day data loads than the statewide average.
• Wi‑Fi calling is widely used in older, signal-attenuating buildings, especially in Montpelier’s historic structures and in rural homes, mitigating indoor coverage issues more effectively than in parts of Vermont where broadband is less mature.

Bottom line

• Washington County exhibits slightly higher mobile and smartphone adoption than Vermont overall, better 5G availability where most people live and travel, and faster median performance along I‑89 and in Barre–Montpelier. Rural pockets within the county still mirror the state’s terrain-related coverage challenges, but ongoing fiber backhaul upgrades and the area’s role as a governmental and service hub keep mobile experience measurably stronger than Vermont’s rural baseline.

Washington County, VT social media snapshot (modeled local estimates)

• Basis: 2024 Pew Research Center U.S. adult platform adoption rates applied to Washington County’s adult population (≈48,000; U.S. Census Bureau 2023 estimates). Figures below are adult user estimates unless noted.

User stats

• Adult population: ~48,000 (of ~60,000 total residents)
• Estimated adult users by platform (share of adults; ≈user count):
  • YouTube: 83% (39,800)
  • Facebook: 68% (32,600)
  • Instagram: 47% (22,600)
  • TikTok: 33% (15,800)
  • Snapchat: 30% (14,400)
  • Pinterest: 35% (16,800)
  • LinkedIn: 31% (14,900)
  • X (Twitter): 22% (10,600)
  • Reddit: 22% (10,600)
  • WhatsApp: 21% (10,100)
  • Nextdoor: 20% (9,600) Note: Washington County skews older than the U.S. average, so Facebook/Nextdoor are likely at or above these estimates, while Instagram/TikTok may be slightly below.

Age groups (share of county’s social media users; modeled from Pew age adoption plus local age structure)

• 18–29: ~21%
• 30–49: ~37%
• 50–64: ~27%
• 65+: ~15%

Gender breakdown (overall)

• Women: ~51–52% of social media users
• Men: ~48–49% of social media users Platform skews: Pinterest and Snapchat lean female; Reddit and X lean male; Facebook and YouTube are broadly balanced; LinkedIn slightly male-leaning.

Most-used platforms (ranked, adults)

1. YouTube (~83%)
2. Facebook (~68%)
3. Instagram (~47%)
4. Pinterest (~35%)
5. TikTok (~33%)
6. LinkedIn (~31%)
7. Snapchat (~30%)
8. X/Twitter (~22%)
9. Reddit (~22%)
10. WhatsApp (~21%)
11. Nextdoor (~20%)

Behavioral trends observed/expected locally

• Community-first usage: Heavy reliance on Facebook Groups and Pages for town government updates, school notices, storm/flood alerts, mutual aid, buy/sell/trade, and local events. Nextdoor use is concentrated in denser neighborhoods (e.g., Montpelier/Barre) for safety notices and services.
• Hyperlocal forums: Front Porch Forum remains a distinctive Vermont channel for neighborhood announcements, lost/found, and civic discussion; many residents treat it as a daily bulletin.
• Video for how-to and civic content: YouTube is a go-to for DIY, home/land projects, and local meeting replays/streams via regional access channels, driving high passive consumption among 30+ cohorts.
• Small-business marketing: Restaurants, breweries, outdoor/rec and ski-area–adjacent businesses lean on Instagram Reels and Facebook Events; boosted posts target day-trip tourism and seasonal peaks.
• Younger cohort patterns: Norwich University and local high school/college-age residents over-index on TikTok, Snapchat, and Instagram Stories for entertainment, campus life, and local happenings; Facebook usage is more functional (events, groups).
• News and emergencies: During weather-related disruptions, Facebook Groups and local media pages see sharp spikes in engagement, shares, and comment threads; residents check multiple sources and cross-post to Front Porch Forum.
• Messaging and dark social: Event coordination and recommendations often move into private Facebook Messenger/Instagram DMs; WhatsApp is niche, mainly for family/immigrant or cross-border ties.
• Timing: Engagement typically peaks early morning (commute/school run), lunch, and 6–9 p.m.; weekends skew to events, dining, and trail/conditions content.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2023 county population estimates), Pew Research Center (2024 Social Media Use). Figures are modeled estimates for Washington County based on those datasets.