Mediabistro Logo Mediabistro Logo
  • Jobs
    Search Creative Jobs Hot Jobs Remote Media Jobs Create Job Alerts
    Job Categories
    Creative & Design Marketing & Communications Operations & Strategy Production Sales & Business Development Writing & Editing
    Quick Links
    Search All Jobs Remote Jobs Create Job Alerts
  • Career Resources
    Career Advice & Articles Media Industry News Media Career Interviews Creative Tools Resume Writing Services Interview Coaching Job Market Insights Member Profiles
  • Mediabistro Membership
    Membership Overview How to Pitch (Premium Tool) Editorial Calendars (Premium Access) Courses & Training Programs Membership FAQ
  • Log In
Post Jobs
Mediabistro Logo Mediabistro Logo
Search Creative Jobs Hot Jobs Remote Media Jobs Create Job Alerts
Job Categories
Creative & Design Marketing & Communications Operations & Strategy Production Sales & Business Development Writing & Editing
Quick Links
Search All Jobs Remote Jobs Create Job Alerts
Career Advice & Articles Media Industry News Media Career Interviews Creative Tools Resume Writing Services Interview Coaching Job Market Insights Member Profiles
Membership Overview How to Pitch (Premium Tool) Editorial Calendars (Premium Access) Courses & Training Programs Membership FAQ
Log In
Post Jobs
Log In | Sign Up

Follow Us!

NYC

13.8 million votes: See the demographics of New York's voting population

13.8 million votes: See the demographics of New York's voting population
By Stacker Feed
4 min read • Published November 3, 2021
By Stacker Feed
4 min read • Published November 3, 2021

rawpixel.com // Shutterstock

13.8 million votes: See the demographics of New York’s voting population

In 2020, 158.4 million citizens—almost two-thirds of estimated eligible voters—voted in the presidential elections, according to the Pew Research Center. The number represented a higher than average turnout, with people voting in numbers not seen since 1980 and possibly well before.

Stacker compiled voter demographics for each state and Washington, D.C., using the 2019 U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (released in September 2020). Each slide shows the state’s voting-eligible population (citizens who are 18 or older) and the breakdown of that population by sex, age, race, and education. Economic statistics are not included because the American Community Survey does not account for COVID-19, which affected unemployment, poverty, and medical insurance status for millions of Americans. In order to avoid making any assumptions about the data or the participants of the American Community Survey, Stacker used the exact wording of the “race” and “sex” framework that was provided in the census data.

Keep reading to see the voter demographics of your state.

New York by the numbers

– Voting-eligible population: 13,810,830
– Breakdown by sex: 47.7% male, 52.3% female
– Breakdown by age: 21.0% 18-29 years old, 23.3% 30-44 years old, 33.0% 45-64 years old, 22.6% 65+ years old
– Breakdown by race: 68.5% White, 15.6% Black or African American, 6.7% Asian, 15.2% Hispanic or Latino, 0.4% Native American or Alaska Native, 0.0% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 2.5% two or more races
– Breakdown by education: 3.8% less than high school education, 6.4% some high school (no diploma), 25.8% high school graduate or equivalency, 18.5% some college (no degree), 8.9% associate’s degree, 21.3% bachelor’s degree, 15.2% graduate or professional degree

Tied with Florida for the third-most electoral votes at 29, New York has voted Democratic in every presidential election since 1988. One-third of the state’s registered voters reside in New York City, with a record 4.6 million on the voter rolls as of 2017. The Empire State is one of the most ethnically diverse in the nation, and nearly 31% of registered voters are Black or Latino.

By percentage, voters aged 45–64 are the highest in every state, with registered voters over the age of 45 comprising more than half the country’s population. Older voters also trend toward turning out to vote at a higher rate and played a significant role in former President Donald Trump’s 2016 victory in Florida.

Along racial lines, Black or African American voters in Louisiana and Georgia comprise more than 30% of the state’s registered voters. California and Texas—which award the most electoral votes at 55 and 38, respectively—boast the highest numbers of Latino voters. On the other end of the spectrum, West Virginia and Maine boast the highest percentage of white voters. A number of states had already seen record voter turnouts, with 16 seeing more than half of its registered voters casting a ballot before Election Day.

Continue reading for a glimpse into the voter demographics of neighboring states.

Rhode Island

– Voting-eligible population: 800,798
– Breakdown by sex: 47.7% male, 52.3% female
– Breakdown by age: 21.3% 18-29 years old, 21.9% 30-44 years old, 34.1% 45-64 years old, 22.8% 65+ years old
– Breakdown by race: 84.0% White, 6.2% Black or African American, 2.6% Asian, 11.6% Hispanic or Latino, 0.0% Native American or Alaska Native, 0.0% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 2.8% two or more races
– Breakdown by education: 3.4% less than high school education, 6.0% some high school (no diploma), 29.0% high school graduate or equivalency, 21.0% some college (no degree), 8.2% associate’s degree, 19.9% bachelor’s degree, 12.5% graduate or professional degree

With only four electoral votes, Rhode Island’s percentage of picking the successful presidential candidate since 1900 is 73.33%. Like so many other U.S. regions, Rhode Island is seeing record-level numbers regarding early voting, according to the Boston Globe, adding up to 55,000 residents casting their ballots in October 2020.

Vermont

– Voting-eligible population: 498,705
– Breakdown by sex: 49.0% male, 51.0% female
– Breakdown by age: 20.4% 18-29 years old, 20.7% 30-44 years old, 34.1% 45-64 years old, 24.9% 65+ years old
– Breakdown by race: 95.6% White, 1.0% Black or African American, 1.0% Asian, 1.6% Hispanic or Latino, 0.0% Native American or Alaska Native, 0.0% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 0.0% two or more races
– Breakdown by education: 1.7% less than high school education, 4.9% some high school (no diploma), 29.7% high school graduate or equivalency, 20.2% some college (no degree), 8.2% associate’s degree, 21.3% bachelor’s degree, 14.0% graduate or professional degree

With a low voting-eligible population, the Green Mountain State holds just three electoral votes. Based on the highest percentage, white female voters between the ages of 45–64 who have a bachelor’s degree are the most influential balloters in Vermont. Along with several other U.S. states, Vermont is breaking voting records, turning in more absentee ballots than ever before.

Topics:

NYC
LA

California is the #1 state with the fewest people living in maternal health care deserts

California is the #1 state with the fewest people living in maternal health care deserts
By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 29, 2021
By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 29, 2021

Helen Sushitskaya // Shutterstock

California is the #1 state with the fewest people living in maternal health care deserts

Compared to other developed nations, the United States regularly ranks among the worst countries for maternal and infant health outcomes. Childbirth outcomes are often tied to a birthing parent’s circumstances, fueling wide disparities at the geographic, demographic, and income levels.

Research has shown that access to prenatal care, family planning services, and other contraceptive resources decreases maternal and infant mortality. However, an increasing number of counties throughout the country are losing access to obstetric care. Aging populations, limited staff, and low reimbursement rates for Medicaid patients are factors that have made rural hospital birth units costly to operate.

Stacker followed the March of Dimes’ definition of a maternity care desert, including counties with no hospitals with obstetric care, OB/GYNs, or certified nurse-midwives. To identify affected counties, Stacker analyzed the Area Health Resource Files from the Health Resources and Services Administration and merged this data with county-level birth data collected by the National Vital Statistics System to calculate how many births in each state are to parents who live in maternal health care deserts.

Stacker also used 2020 Census population data to calculate what percentage of a state’s population lives in counties without access to maternal health care. Although maternal health care deserts have a disproportionate impact upon people between the ages 15-44 who can get pregnant, Stacker used population data across all sexes and ages to include county-level demographic data and more deeply compare racial disparities.

Keep reading to learn about the challenges facing maternal health care in your state and how state policies and community-driven programs seek to bridge rural and demographic health care disparities, or find the national list here.

California by the numbers

– Percent of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts: 0.3% (1,127 births)
– Population who lives in maternal health care desert: 0.3%
— 0.5% of state’s white population
— 0.0% of state’s Black population
— 0.6% of state’s Native American population
— 0.2% of state’s Hispanic population
— 0.1% of state’s Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander population
— 0.1% of state’s Asian population

Even in areas with access to maternal care, other challenges like poverty, limited transit, lack of insurance, and systematic racism can put families at risk of poor maternal and infant health outcomes. Estimates from the CDC show that 60% of pregnancy-related deaths in the U.S. are preventable, but inadequate treatment and identification of health risks contribute to hundreds of maternal deaths annually.

Pregnant Black people face disproportionate risks when giving birth. The infant mortality rate for Black children in the U.S. is double the rate for white children. Maternal mortality rates show similarly grim patterns, with 44 deaths per 100,000 live births among Black people compared to 17.9 per 100,000 live births for white people.

Continue reading to see the states that have the most and fewest people living in maternal health care deserts.

States where the most people live in maternal health care deserts

#1. Mississippi: 23.6% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (8,484 births)
#2. South Dakota: 23.2% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (2,715 births)
#3. Kentucky: 22.4% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (11,821 births)

States where the fewest people live in maternal health care deserts

#1. California: 0.3% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (1,127 births)
#2. New York: 0.3% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (730 births)
#3. Arizona: 0.4% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (311 births)

Topics:

LA
NYC

New York is the #2 state with the fewest people living in maternal health care deserts

New York is the #2 state with the fewest people living in maternal health care deserts
By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 29, 2021
By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 29, 2021

Prostock-studio // Shutterstock

New York is the #2 state with the fewest people living in maternal health care deserts

Compared to other developed nations, the United States regularly ranks among the worst countries for maternal and infant health outcomes. Childbirth outcomes are often tied to a birthing parent’s circumstances, fueling wide disparities at the geographic, demographic, and income levels.

Research has shown that access to prenatal care, family planning services, and other contraceptive resources decreases maternal and infant mortality. However, an increasing number of counties throughout the country are losing access to obstetric care. Aging populations, limited staff, and low reimbursement rates for Medicaid patients are factors that have made rural hospital birth units costly to operate.

Stacker followed the March of Dimes’ definition of a maternity care desert, including counties with no hospitals with obstetric care, OB/GYNs, or certified nurse-midwives. To identify affected counties, Stacker analyzed the Area Health Resource Files from the Health Resources and Services Administration and merged this data with county-level birth data collected by the National Vital Statistics System to calculate how many births in each state are to parents who live in maternal health care deserts.

Stacker also used 2020 Census population data to calculate what percentage of a state’s population lives in counties without access to maternal health care. Although maternal health care deserts have a disproportionate impact upon people between the ages 15-44 who can get pregnant, Stacker used population data across all sexes and ages to include county-level demographic data and more deeply compare racial disparities.

Keep reading to learn about the challenges facing maternal health care in your state and how state policies and community-driven programs seek to bridge rural and demographic health care disparities, or find the national list here.

New York by the numbers

– Percent of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts: 0.3% (730 births)
– Population who lives in maternal health care desert: 0.3%
— 0.5% of state’s white population
— 0.1% of state’s Black population
— 0.2% of state’s Native American population
— 0.1% of state’s Hispanic population
— 0.1% of state’s Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander population
— 0.0% of state’s Asian population

Even in areas with access to maternal care, other challenges like poverty, limited transit, lack of insurance, and systematic racism can put families at risk of poor maternal and infant health outcomes. Estimates from the CDC show that 60% of pregnancy-related deaths in the U.S. are preventable, but inadequate treatment and identification of health risks contribute to hundreds of maternal deaths annually.

Pregnant Black people face disproportionate risks when giving birth. The infant mortality rate for Black children in the U.S. is double the rate for white children. Maternal mortality rates show similarly grim patterns, with 44 deaths per 100,000 live births among Black people compared to 17.9 per 100,000 live births for white people.

Continue reading to see the states that have the most and fewest people living in maternal health care deserts.

States where the most people live in maternal health care deserts

#1. Mississippi: 23.6% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (8,484 births)
#2. South Dakota: 23.2% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (2,715 births)
#3. Kentucky: 22.4% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (11,821 births)

States where the fewest people live in maternal health care deserts

#1. California: 0.3% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (1,127 births)
#2. New York: 0.3% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (730 births)
#3. Arizona: 0.4% of state’s births to parents who live in maternal health care deserts (311 births)

Topics:

NYC
LA

California is the #1 state with the fewest registered hunters

By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 20, 2021
By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 20, 2021

Canva

California is the #1 state with the fewest registered hunters

With a 3 million year record of it, it’s safe to say hunting is one of the oldest forms of human activity. Stacker compiled a complete list of the states with the most registered hunters using 2020 data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. States are ranked by percent of residents with hunting licenses. Population data is from the Census as of 2018.

There are 15.2 million hunting license holders in the United States. Over the centuries, hunting has largely evolved from necessity to sport—although many hunters in the U.S. do process hunted animals for food. As hunting gained popularity as a leisure activity, ecosystems suffered and led to various regulations in order to help preserve and conserve wildlife resources. In the United States, each state has set dates for hunting seasons, thresholds for how many tags or wild game stamps are allowed, and specific areas that are off-limits to hunting in order to help preserve habitats and animal populations.

In the past several decades, the number of people with hunting licenses in the United States has been on a sharp decline. This can be attributed to a few factors, namely the rise in the urbanization of the United States, the development of farmland, a lack of free time among hunters, and limited access to hunting land, writes the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Licenses dropped from a peak of roughly 17 million in the 1980s to 15 million in 2019, according to The Seattle Times.

California by the numbers

– Percent of residents with paid hunting licenses: 0.7%
– Total paid hunting license holders: 267,170
– Total hunting license, tags, permits and stamps: 991,897
– Gross cost of all hunting licenses: $21,107,452

Over the past 50 years, the number of hunting licenses in California has been on a rapid decline, falling 70% from more than 760,000 in the 1970s to under 268,000 in 2020—even as the state’s population has skyrocketed, according to The Mercury News. Urbanization and strict gun laws, in addition to a drop in overall interest, are why California has the fewest number of hunting licenses in the nation.

The drop-off in revenue from hunting licenses is starting to pose a problem for conservation groups. Thanks to the 1937 Pittman-Robertson Act, an 11% excise tax was placed on the sale of firearms, which was then used for conservation. Not only that, but the profits from hunting licenses themselves also go directly to funding for conservation.

There was a slight uptick in the number of hunters earlier in 2020 as some U.S. meat processors stopped operating because of COVID-19. People also had a lot more time on their hands, according to Reuters. Indiana, for example, saw a 28% jump in turkey license sales during the first week of the season. Whether these results will be sustained remains to be seen.

So which states are holding steady with hunting traditions? Take a look to see which states made the top and bottom of the list.

States with the most registered hunters

#1. South Dakota: 24.1% of residents with paid hunting licenses
#2. Wyoming: 22.7% of residents with paid hunting licenses
#3. Montana: 21.1% of residents with paid hunting licenses

States with the least registered hunters

#1. California: 0.7% of residents with paid hunting licenses
#2. Rhode Island: 0.7% of residents with paid hunting licenses
#3. Hawaii: 0.7% of residents with paid hunting licenses

Topics:

LA
NYC

See how many registered hunters are in New York

By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 20, 2021
By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 20, 2021

Canva

See how many registered hunters are in New York

With a 3 million year record of it, it’s safe to say hunting is one of the oldest forms of human activity. Stacker compiled a complete list of the states with the most registered hunters using 2020 data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. States are ranked by percent of residents with hunting licenses. Population data is from the Census as of 2018.

There are 15.2 million hunting license holders in the United States. Over the centuries, hunting has largely evolved from necessity to sport—although many hunters in the U.S. do process hunted animals for food. As hunting gained popularity as a leisure activity, ecosystems suffered and led to various regulations in order to help preserve and conserve wildlife resources. In the United States, each state has set dates for hunting seasons, thresholds for how many tags or wild game stamps are allowed, and specific areas that are off-limits to hunting in order to help preserve habitats and animal populations.

In the past several decades, the number of people with hunting licenses in the United States has been on a sharp decline. This can be attributed to a few factors, namely the rise in the urbanization of the United States, the development of farmland, a lack of free time among hunters, and limited access to hunting land, writes the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Licenses dropped from a peak of roughly 17 million in the 1980s to 15 million in 2019, according to The Seattle Times.

New York by the numbers

– Percent of residents with paid hunting licenses: 2.8%
– Total paid hunting license holders: 556,897
– Total hunting license, tags, permits and stamps: 1,389,949
– Gross cost of all hunting licenses: $24,248,161

Less than 3% of the New York State population has a hunting license. However, among that population, women are the fastest-growing demographic. According to New York Hunting & Trapping, women are drawn to the sport to spend more time with family, to put organic and locally sourced food on the table, and to spend more time outside. In 2018, 53,000 women in the state had hunting licenses.

The drop-off in revenue from hunting licenses is starting to pose a problem for conservation groups. Thanks to the 1937 Pittman-Robertson Act, an 11% excise tax was placed on the sale of firearms, which was then used for conservation. Not only that, but the profits from hunting licenses themselves also go directly to funding for conservation.

There was a slight uptick in the number of hunters earlier in 2020 as some U.S. meat processors stopped operating because of COVID-19. People also had a lot more time on their hands, according to Reuters. Indiana, for example, saw a 28% jump in turkey license sales during the first week of the season. Whether these results will be sustained remains to be seen.

So which states are holding steady with hunting traditions? Take a look to see which states made the top and bottom of the list.

States with the most registered hunters

#1. South Dakota: 24.1% of residents with paid hunting licenses
#2. Wyoming: 22.7% of residents with paid hunting licenses
#3. Montana: 21.1% of residents with paid hunting licenses

States with the least registered hunters

#1. California: 0.7% of residents with paid hunting licenses
#2. Rhode Island: 0.7% of residents with paid hunting licenses
#3. Hawaii: 0.7% of residents with paid hunting licenses

Topics:

NYC
NYC

Most diverse counties in New York

Most diverse counties in New York
By Stacker Feed
8 min read • Published October 16, 2021
By Stacker Feed
8 min read • Published October 16, 2021

Canva

Most diverse counties in New York

The United States has a longstanding reputation as being a melting pot (or salad bowl), with its diversity manifesting itself across many different demographics. However, some places across the country are notably more heterogeneous than others.

Stacker compiled a list of the most diverse counties in New York using data from using data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Counties are ranked by the highest Simpson’s diversity index score. Simpson’s diversity index measures community diversity on a scale of 0 (least diverse) to 1 (most diverse), more on the calculation can be read here.

Think you know which counties in your home state might be the most diverse? Keep reading to see if your predictions are correct.

Marduk // Wikimedia Commons

#50. Steuben County

– Index: 0.103
– Total population: 96,422
– White: 94.7% (91,286)
– Black or African American: 1.7% (1,623)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.1% (103)
– Asian: 1.5% (1,480)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (3)
– 2 or more races: 1.5% (1,465)
– Some other Race: 0.5% (462)

Stef Ko // Shutterstock

#49. Cortland County

– Index: 0.103
– Total population: 47,865
– White: 94.6% (45,302)
– Black or African American: 1.9% (928)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (107)
– Asian: 0.8% (364)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (7)
– 2 or more races: 1.9% (921)
– Some other Race: 0.5% (236)

Colgate University // Wikimedia Commons

#48. Madison County

– Index: 0.104
– Total population: 71,205
– White: 94.6% (67,360)
– Black or African American: 1.8% (1,268)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.5% (339)
– Asian: 0.9% (638)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (79)
– 2 or more races: 1.7% (1,212)
– Some other Race: 0.4% (309)

Beyond My Ken // Wikimedia Commons

#47. Fulton County

– Index: 0.108
– Total population: 53,646
– White: 94.4% (50,640)
– Black or African American: 2.1% (1,119)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.4% (209)
– Asian: 0.8% (417)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (7)
– 2 or more races: 1.5% (810)
– Some other Race: 0.8% (444)

UpstateNYer // Wikimedia Commons

#46. Washington County

– Index: 0.122
– Total population: 61,616
– White: 93.6% (57,686)
– Black or African American: 3.2% (1,969)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.3% (196)
– Asian: 0.6% (371)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (7)
– 2 or more races: 1.4% (869)
– Some other Race: 0.8% (518)

Kenneth Sponsler // Shutterstock

#45. Otsego County

– Index: 0.126
– Total population: 59,972
– White: 93.4% (56,036)
– Black or African American: 2.2% (1,303)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (92)
– Asian: 1.4% (814)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (6)
– 2 or more races: 2.2% (1,291)
– Some other Race: 0.7% (430)

Andre Carrotflower // Wikimedia Commons

#44. Wayne County

– Index: 0.135
– Total population: 90,519
– White: 92.9% (84,123)
– Black or African American: 2.8% (2,543)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (148)
– Asian: 0.8% (725)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (105)
– 2 or more races: 2.1% (1,915)
– Some other Race: 1.1% (960)

tomtsya// Shutterstock

#43. Essex County

– Index: 0.136
– Total population: 37,459
– White: 92.9% (34,788)
– Black or African American: 3.2% (1,194)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (93)
– Asian: 0.3% (103)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (7)
– 2 or more races: 2.1% (768)
– Some other Race: 1.4% (506)

P199 // Wikimedia Commons

#42. St. Lawrence County

– Index: 0.137
– Total population: 108,913
– White: 92.8% (101,115)
– Black or African American: 2.4% (2,654)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.8% (831)
– Asian: 1.0% (1,100)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (60)
– 2 or more races: 1.9% (2,059)
– Some other Race: 1.0% (1,094)

PhotoItaliaStudio // Shutterstock

#41. Saratoga County

– Index: 0.139
– Total population: 228,502
– White: 92.7% (211,792)
– Black or African American: 1.7% (3,992)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (508)
– Asian: 2.9% (6,697)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (41)
– 2 or more races: 1.9% (4,277)
– Some other Race: 0.5% (1,195)

Benjamin D. Esham (bdesham) // Wikimedia Commons

#40. Livingston County

– Index: 0.140
– Total population: 63,591
– White: 92.6% (58,916)
– Black or African American: 2.9% (1,813)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (146)
– Asian: 1.3% (830)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (30)
– 2 or more races: 1.7% (1,065)
– Some other Race: 1.2% (791)

Daniel Case // Wikimedia Commons

#39. Ontario County

– Index: 0.142
– Total population: 109,511
– White: 92.6% (101,371)
– Black or African American: 2.5% (2,769)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.4% (388)
– Asian: 1.4% (1,501)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (36)
– 2 or more races: 1.7% (1,864)
– Some other Race: 1.4% (1,582)

Andre Carrotflower // Wikimedia Commons

#38. Chautauqua County

– Index: 0.148
– Total population: 128,496
– White: 92.2% (118,515)
– Black or African American: 2.6% (3,338)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.3% (410)
– Asian: 0.6% (723)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (82)
– 2 or more races: 2.0% (2,585)
– Some other Race: 2.2% (2,843)

Daniel Case // Wikimedia Commons

#37. Genesee County

– Index: 0.153
– Total population: 57,808
– White: 91.9% (53,142)
– Black or African American: 2.1% (1,214)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.8% (490)
– Asian: 0.8% (455)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (0)
– 2 or more races: 2.7% (1,536)
– Some other Race: 1.7% (971)

Pubdog // Wikimedia Commons

#36. Cattaraugus County

– Index: 0.154
– Total population: 77,121
– White: 91.9% (70,859)
– Black or African American: 1.4% (1,116)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 3.2% (2,485)
– Asian: 0.8% (610)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (0)
– 2 or more races: 2.1% (1,581)
– Some other Race: 0.6% (470)

PQK // Shuterstock

#35. Cayuga County

– Index: 0.155
– Total population: 77,425
– White: 91.8% (71,056)
– Black or African American: 4.3% (3,303)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.1% (106)
– Asian: 0.6% (441)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (5)
– 2 or more races: 2.5% (1,910)
– Some other Race: 0.8% (604)

Kenneth C. Zirkel // Wikimedia Commons

#34. Wyoming County

– Index: 0.160
– Total population: 40,305
– White: 91.5% (36,882)
– Black or African American: 4.1% (1,669)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.5% (203)
– Asian: 0.4% (167)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (0)
– 2 or more races: 2.0% (815)
– Some other Race: 1.4% (569)

marjobani // Wikimedia Commons

#33. Seneca County

– Index: 0.166
– Total population: 34,390
– White: 91.2% (31,355)
– Black or African American: 5.1% (1,744)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.4% (143)
– Asian: 0.8% (285)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (8)
– 2 or more races: 1.6% (543)
– Some other Race: 0.9% (312)

Richard Cavalleri // Shutterstock

#32. Clinton County

– Index: 0.171
– Total population: 80,583
– White: 90.9% (73,237)
– Black or African American: 4.3% (3,447)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.3% (221)
– Asian: 1.4% (1,133)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (15)
– 2 or more races: 1.4% (1,123)
– Some other Race: 1.7% (1,407)

Felix Lipov // Shutterstock

#31. Greene County

– Index: 0.193
– Total population: 47,424
– White: 89.6% (42,486)
– Black or African American: 5.8% (2,758)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.6% (304)
– Asian: 1.0% (497)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (3)
– 2 or more races: 1.9% (895)
– Some other Race: 1.0% (481)

Daniel Case // Wikimedia Commons

#30. Columbia County

– Index: 0.205
– Total population: 60,371
– White: 89.0% (53,725)
– Black or African American: 4.5% (2,741)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.1% (34)
– Asian: 1.8% (1,084)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (0)
– 2 or more races: 2.7% (1,658)
– Some other Race: 1.9% (1,129)

Jimmy Emerson // Wikimedia Commons

#29. Orleans County

– Index: 0.206
– Total population: 40,904
– White: 88.9% (36,345)
– Black or African American: 5.8% (2,383)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.3% (136)
– Asian: 0.6% (250)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (0)
– 2 or more races: 2.4% (993)
– Some other Race: 1.9% (797)

Lvklock // Wikimedia Commons

#28. Chemung County

– Index: 0.219
– Total population: 84,895
– White: 88.1% (74,766)
– Black or African American: 6.3% (5,324)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.3% (250)
– Asian: 1.3% (1,135)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (12)
– 2 or more races: 3.3% (2,798)
– Some other Race: 0.7% (610)

Mihai_Andritoiu // Shutterstock

#27. Niagara County

– Index: 0.233
– Total population: 210,820
– White: 87.2% (183,860)
– Black or African American: 7.0% (14,806)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 1.0% (2,074)
– Asian: 1.1% (2,337)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (62)
– 2 or more races: 2.8% (5,998)
– Some other Race: 0.8% (1,683)

Jwilson855 // Wikimedia Commons

#26. Montgomery County

– Index: 0.234
– Total population: 49,302
– White: 87.2% (42,970)
– Black or African American: 2.2% (1,091)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.1% (73)
– Asian: 0.7% (362)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (0)
– 2 or more races: 2.8% (1,387)
– Some other Race: 6.9% (3,419)

James Kirkikis // Shutterstock

#25. Putnam County

– Index: 0.240
– Total population: 98,787
– White: 86.9% (85,846)
– Black or African American: 3.1% (3,030)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (203)
– Asian: 2.1% (2,039)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (23)
– 2 or more races: 2.1% (2,056)
– Some other Race: 5.7% (5,590)

Wangkun Jia // Shutterstock

#24. Jefferson County

– Index: 0.249
– Total population: 112,842
– White: 86.4% (97,448)
– Black or African American: 6.1% (6,932)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.5% (564)
– Asian: 1.8% (1,983)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (249)
– 2 or more races: 3.8% (4,341)
– Some other Race: 1.2% (1,325)

Matt H. Wade // Wikimedia Commons

#23. Rensselaer County

– Index: 0.253
– Total population: 159,185
– White: 86.1% (137,002)
– Black or African American: 6.5% (10,268)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.1% (228)
– Asian: 2.7% (4,282)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (13)
– 2 or more races: 3.6% (5,717)
– Some other Race: 1.1% (1,675)

Canva

#22. Broome County

– Index: 0.263
– Total population: 193,188
– White: 85.5% (165,108)
– Black or African American: 5.7% (10,918)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (348)
– Asian: 4.3% (8,389)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (75)
– 2 or more races: 3.3% (6,292)
– Some other Race: 1.1% (2,058)

Nina Alizada // Shutterstock

#21. Oneida County

– Index: 0.266
– Total population: 229,959
– White: 85.3% (196,219)
– Black or African American: 6.0% (13,771)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (542)
– Asian: 4.0% (9,304)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (70)
– 2 or more races: 3.0% (6,790)
– Some other Race: 1.4% (3,263)

Fred Hsu // Wikimedia Commons

#20. Ulster County

– Index: 0.279
– Total population: 178,665
– White: 84.5% (151,001)
– Black or African American: 6.0% (10,780)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (395)
– Asian: 1.9% (3,396)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (102)
– 2 or more races: 4.2% (7,476)
– Some other Race: 3.1% (5,515)

Mwanner // Wikimedia Commons

#19. Franklin County

– Index: 0.308
– Total population: 50,477
– White: 82.7% (41,726)
– Black or African American: 5.7% (2,863)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 7.1% (3,609)
– Asian: 0.6% (280)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (111)
– 2 or more races: 1.6% (831)
– Some other Race: 2.1% (1,057)

Tim Hettler from New York, NY, USA // Wikimedia Commons

#18. Suffolk County

– Index: 0.339
– Total population: 1.5 million
– White: 80.7% (1,196,719)
– Black or African American: 7.8% (116,018)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.3% (4,212)
– Asian: 3.9% (58,204)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (418)
– 2 or more races: 2.3% (33,829)
– Some other Race: 5.0% (74,432)

Lewis Liu // Shutterstock

#17. Tompkins County

– Index: 0.343
– Total population: 102,642
– White: 80.2% (82,359)
– Black or African American: 3.8% (3,859)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (224)
– Asian: 9.7% (9,964)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (57)
– 2 or more races: 4.4% (4,513)
– Some other Race: 1.6% (1,666)

littlenySTOCK // Shutterstock

#16. Onondaga County

– Index: 0.351
– Total population: 462,872
– White: 79.6% (368,328)
– Black or African American: 11.4% (52,912)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.6% (2,568)
– Asian: 3.7% (17,041)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (162)
– 2 or more races: 3.6% (16,871)
– Some other Race: 1.1% (4,990)

Eric Richards // Wikimedia Commons

#15. Sullivan County

– Index: 0.351
– Total population: 75,116
– White: 79.8% (59,949)
– Black or African American: 8.0% (5,990)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.3% (196)
– Asian: 1.7% (1,265)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (0)
– 2 or more races: 4.6% (3,433)
– Some other Race: 5.7% (4,283)

Colin D. Young // Shutterstock

#14. Dutchess County

– Index: 0.373
– Total population: 293,754
– White: 78.2% (229,746)
– Black or African American: 10.5% (30,970)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.3% (934)
– Asian: 3.5% (10,413)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (155)
– 2 or more races: 3.5% (10,314)
– Some other Race: 3.8% (11,222)

Canva

#13. Erie County

– Index: 0.374
– Total population: 919,355
– White: 77.8% (715,409)
– Black or African American: 13.5% (123,742)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.5% (4,634)
– Asian: 3.6% (32,793)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (289)
– 2 or more races: 2.4% (22,139)
– Some other Race: 2.2% (20,349)

Paul Brady Photography // Shutterstock

#12. Monroe County

– Index: 0.397
– Total population: 743,341
– White: 76.0% (564,617)
– Black or African American: 15.3% (113,808)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.4% (3,040)
– Asian: 3.6% (27,115)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (290)
– 2 or more races: 2.9% (21,606)
– Some other Race: 1.7% (12,865)

UpstateNYer // Wikimedia Commons

#11. Schenectady County

– Index: 0.402
– Total population: 154,859
– White: 76.3% (118,130)
– Black or African American: 10.1% (15,590)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (359)
– Asian: 4.7% (7,228)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (84)
– 2 or more races: 4.8% (7,389)
– Some other Race: 3.9% (6,079)

Wangkun Jia // Shutterstock

#10. Albany County

– Index: 0.411
– Total population: 306,968
– White: 75.3% (231,246)
– Black or African American: 12.4% (38,035)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (494)
– Asian: 6.6% (20,192)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (129)
– 2 or more races: 4.2% (12,787)
– Some other Race: 1.3% (4,085)

Roman Babakin // Shutterstock

#9. Richmond County

– Index: 0.429
– Total population: 474,893
– White: 74.1% (352,034)
– Black or African American: 10.3% (48,958)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (1,026)
– Asian: 9.3% (44,246)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (219)
– 2 or more races: 2.3% (10,862)
– Some other Race: 3.7% (17,548)

Mwanner // Wikimedia Commons

#8. Orange County

– Index: 0.430
– Total population: 380,085
– White: 74.1% (281,683)
– Black or African American: 11.0% (41,779)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.4% (1,482)
– Asian: 2.7% (10,280)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (298)
– 2 or more races: 3.5% (13,477)
– Some other Race: 8.2% (31,086)

Felix Lipov // Shutterstock

#7. Rockland County

– Index: 0.475
– Total population: 324,422
– White: 70.7% (229,240)
– Black or African American: 12.3% (39,845)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.2% (524)
– Asian: 5.9% (19,099)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (27)
– 2 or more races: 2.7% (8,694)
– Some other Race: 8.3% (26,993)

littlenySTOCK // Shutterstock

#6. Nassau County

– Index: 0.508
– Total population: 1.4 million
– White: 68.0% (922,873)
– Black or African American: 11.7% (158,857)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.3% (3,912)
– Asian: 9.7% (130,971)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (402)
– 2 or more races: 3.0% (41,106)
– Some other Race: 7.3% (98,388)

Canva

#5. Westchester County

– Index: 0.547
– Total population: 968,890
– White: 64.3% (622,855)
– Black or African American: 14.9% (144,053)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.4% (3,594)
– Asian: 6.0% (58,140)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (251)
– 2 or more races: 3.1% (29,968)
– Some other Race: 11.4% (110,029)

pisaphotography // Shutterstock

#4. New York County

– Index: 0.629
– Total population: 1.6 million
– White: 56.5% (922,033)
– Black or African American: 14.8% (240,993)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.4% (6,178)
– Asian: 12.2% (198,833)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (888)
– 2 or more races: 4.6% (74,668)
– Some other Race: 11.5% (188,400)

Victor Moussa // Shutterstock

#3. Kings County

– Index: 0.683
– Total population: 2.6 million
– White: 43.7% (1,132,426)
– Black or African American: 32.2% (833,683)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.3% (8,604)
– Asian: 11.9% (307,081)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (1,232)
– 2 or more races: 3.2% (81,786)
– Some other Race: 8.7% (225,162)

Gryffindor // Wikimedia Commons

#2. Bronx County

– Index: 0.706
– Total population: 1.4 million
– White: 22.0% (315,533)
– Black or African American: 35.2% (504,814)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.7% (10,116)
– Asian: 3.7% (52,989)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (1,385)
– 2 or more races: 3.9% (55,868)
– Some other Race: 34.4% (494,363)

Bjoertvedt // Wikimedia Commons

#1. Queens County

– Index: 0.735
– Total population: 2.3 million
– White: 38.3% (875,191)
– Black or African American: 18.3% (418,429)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.5% (10,326)
– Asian: 25.5% (583,459)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (1,078)
– 2 or more races: 3.6% (82,764)
– Some other Race: 13.8% (316,141)

Topics:

NYC
LA

Most diverse counties in California

Most diverse counties in California
By Stacker Feed
8 min read • Published October 16, 2021
By Stacker Feed
8 min read • Published October 16, 2021

Canva

Most diverse counties in California

The United States has a longstanding reputation as being a melting pot (or salad bowl), with its diversity manifesting itself across many different demographics. However, some places across the country are notably more heterogeneous than others.

Stacker compiled a list of the most diverse counties in California using data from using data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Counties are ranked by the highest Simpson’s diversity index score. Simpson’s diversity index measures community diversity on a scale of 0 (least diverse) to 1 (most diverse), more on the calculation can be read here.

Think you know which counties in your home state might be the most diverse? Keep reading to see if your predictions are correct.

DimiTalen // Wikimedia Commons

#50. El Dorado County

– Index: 0.228
– Total population: 188,563
– White: 87.6% (165,234)
– Black or African American: 0.8% (1,516)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.8% (1,532)
– Asian: 4.5% (8,540)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.3% (486)
– 2 or more races: 3.9% (7,263)
– Some other Race: 2.1% (3,992)

Bobak Ha’Eri // Wikimedia Commons

#49. Amador County

– Index: 0.243
– Total population: 38,429
– White: 86.7% (33,327)
– Black or African American: 2.4% (904)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.8% (303)
– Asian: 1.3% (508)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (57)
– 2 or more races: 4.8% (1,830)
– Some other Race: 3.9% (1,500)

Doug Kerr // Wikicommons

#48. Shasta County

– Index: 0.247
– Total population: 179,212
– White: 86.6% (155,124)
– Black or African American: 1.2% (2,088)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 2.7% (4,832)
– Asian: 3.2% (5,798)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (254)
– 2 or more races: 4.2% (7,509)
– Some other Race: 2.0% (3,607)

Almonroth // Wikimedia Commons

#47. Trinity County

– Index: 0.255
– Total population: 12,700
– White: 86.0% (10,924)
– Black or African American: 1.0% (127)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 5.6% (716)
– Asian: 1.8% (226)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (28)
– 2 or more races: 2.0% (251)
– Some other Race: 3.4% (428)

Frank Schulenburg // Wikimedia Commons

#46. Tehama County

– Index: 0.259
– Total population: 63,912
– White: 85.7% (54,795)
– Black or African American: 0.8% (530)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 2.0% (1,255)
– Asian: 1.5% (967)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (28)
– 2 or more races: 4.5% (2,867)
– Some other Race: 5.4% (3,470)

Basar // Wikicommons

#45. San Luis Obispo County

– Index: 0.265
– Total population: 282,165
– White: 85.5% (241,123)
– Black or African American: 1.9% (5,319)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.9% (2,458)
– Asian: 3.6% (10,296)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (265)
– 2 or more races: 3.7% (10,437)
– Some other Race: 4.3% (12,267)

Chmee2 // Wikimedia Commons

#44. Siskiyou County

– Index: 0.275
– Total population: 43,468
– White: 84.8% (36,847)
– Black or African American: 1.6% (695)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 3.7% (1,618)
– Asian: 1.6% (708)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.4% (157)
– 2 or more races: 6.5% (2,807)
– Some other Race: 1.5% (636)

Binksternet // Wikimedia Commons

#43. Mendocino County

– Index: 0.294
– Total population: 87,224
– White: 83.6% (72,935)
– Black or African American: 0.7% (628)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 4.4% (3,818)
– Asian: 2.1% (1,805)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (165)
– 2 or more races: 4.9% (4,290)
– Some other Race: 4.1% (3,583)

clr_flickr from Rocklin, USA // Wikimedia Commons

#42. Mono County

– Index: 0.299
– Total population: 14,310
– White: 83.3% (11,921)
– Black or African American: 0.8% (111)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 3.5% (497)
– Asian: 2.6% (367)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (0)
– 2 or more races: 3.7% (532)
– Some other Race: 6.2% (882)

Finetooth // Wikimedia Commons

#41. Lassen County

– Index: 0.315
– Total population: 30,818
– White: 82.2% (25,324)
– Black or African American: 8.7% (2,686)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 2.8% (864)
– Asian: 1.4% (428)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.8% (247)
– 2 or more races: 2.5% (759)
– Some other Race: 1.7% (510)

Doug Olson // Wikimedia Commons

#40. Placer County

– Index: 0.316
– Total population: 385,512
– White: 82.2% (316,716)
– Black or African American: 1.7% (6,626)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.5% (2,052)
– Asian: 7.5% (28,909)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (858)
– 2 or more races: 4.9% (18,993)
– Some other Race: 2.9% (11,358)

Michael Patrick // Wikimedia Commons

#39. San Benito County

– Index: 0.324
– Total population: 60,376
– White: 81.6% (49,245)
– Black or African American: 0.8% (491)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.7% (443)
– Asian: 3.0% (1,804)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (57)
– 2 or more races: 5.3% (3,198)
– Some other Race: 8.5% (5,138)

Canva

#38. Butte County

– Index: 0.326
– Total population: 225,817
– White: 81.6% (184,180)
– Black or African American: 1.5% (3,461)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 1.2% (2,616)
– Asian: 4.6% (10,432)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.3% (603)
– 2 or more races: 6.1% (13,771)
– Some other Race: 4.8% (10,754)

Trance addict // Wikimedia Commons

#37. Glenn County

– Index: 0.330
– Total population: 27,976
– White: 81.1% (22,685)
– Black or African American: 0.8% (230)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 2.4% (682)
– Asian: 2.9% (825)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.0% (11)
– 2 or more races: 2.3% (645)
– Some other Race: 10.4% (2,898)

Canva

#36. Ventura County

– Index: 0.348
– Total population: 847,263
– White: 80.1% (678,658)
– Black or African American: 1.8% (15,594)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.8% (6,760)
– Asian: 7.3% (62,190)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (1,698)
– 2 or more races: 4.5% (38,136)
– Some other Race: 5.2% (44,227)

Cory Maylett // Wikimedia Commons

#35. Humboldt County

– Index: 0.353
– Total population: 135,940
– White: 79.9% (108,557)
– Black or African American: 1.1% (1,506)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 5.0% (6,846)
– Asian: 3.1% (4,196)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.4% (488)
– 2 or more races: 6.4% (8,640)
– Some other Race: 4.2% (5,707)

Chuck Abbe // Wikimedia Commons

#34. Inyo County

– Index: 0.363
– Total population: 17,977
– White: 78.8% (14,170)
– Black or African American: 0.9% (153)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 11.3% (2,028)
– Asian: 1.9% (350)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (34)
– 2 or more races: 4.7% (850)
– Some other Race: 2.2% (392)

Kglavin // Wikimedia Commons

#33. Marin County

– Index: 0.381
– Total population: 259,943
– White: 77.8% (202,313)
– Black or African American: 2.2% (5,767)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.4% (911)
– Asian: 5.9% (15,367)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (571)
– 2 or more races: 4.9% (12,756)
– Some other Race: 8.6% (22,258)

Pixabay

#32. Santa Barbara County

– Index: 0.385
– Total population: 444,829
– White: 77.5% (344,778)
– Black or African American: 2.0% (8,984)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 1.0% (4,644)
– Asian: 5.6% (24,849)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (581)
– 2 or more races: 4.2% (18,552)
– Some other Race: 9.5% (42,441)

CFang // Wikimedia Commons

#31. Lake County

– Index: 0.390
– Total population: 64,195
– White: 76.9% (49,389)
– Black or African American: 2.3% (1,447)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 3.6% (2,310)
– Asian: 1.1% (723)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (42)
– 2 or more races: 3.7% (2,375)
– Some other Race: 12.3% (7,909)

Public Domain

#30. Stanislaus County

– Index: 0.400
– Total population: 543,194
– White: 76.6% (415,911)
– Black or African American: 3.0% (16,547)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.8% (4,418)
– Asian: 5.5% (30,007)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.7% (3,961)
– 2 or more races: 4.2% (22,564)
– Some other Race: 9.2% (49,786)

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento District // Wikimedia Commons

#29. Yuba County

– Index: 0.409
– Total population: 76,360
– White: 76.0% (58,016)
– Black or African American: 3.4% (2,621)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 1.2% (936)
– Asian: 6.8% (5,201)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.5% (351)
– 2 or more races: 7.4% (5,654)
– Some other Race: 4.7% (3,581)

Aaronbrick // Wikicommons

#28. Santa Cruz County

– Index: 0.417
– Total population: 273,962
– White: 74.8% (204,866)
– Black or African American: 1.1% (2,904)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.5% (1,505)
– Asian: 4.8% (13,134)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (337)
– 2 or more races: 4.8% (13,086)
– Some other Race: 13.9% (38,130)

Fred Hsu // Wikicommons

#27. Sonoma County

– Index: 0.419
– Total population: 499,772
– White: 74.8% (373,667)
– Black or African American: 1.7% (8,269)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.9% (4,395)
– Asian: 4.1% (20,443)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.3% (1,606)
– 2 or more races: 5.4% (26,761)
– Some other Race: 12.9% (64,631)

Canva

#26. Del Norte County

– Index: 0.426
– Total population: 27,495
– White: 74.9% (20,581)
– Black or African American: 3.4% (940)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 7.2% (1,986)
– Asian: 3.2% (888)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (44)
– 2 or more races: 6.3% (1,736)
– Some other Race: 4.8% (1,320)

Canva

#25. Tulare County

– Index: 0.427
– Total population: 461,898
– White: 73.7% (340,462)
– Black or African American: 1.6% (7,201)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 1.3% (6,118)
– Asian: 3.6% (16,690)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (766)
– 2 or more races: 3.4% (15,712)
– Some other Race: 16.2% (74,949)

nickchapman // Wikicommons

#24. Kern County

– Index: 0.429
– Total population: 887,641
– White: 74.4% (660,147)
– Black or African American: 5.5% (48,550)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 1.0% (8,969)
– Asian: 4.7% (42,100)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (1,678)
– 2 or more races: 3.5% (31,032)
– Some other Race: 10.7% (95,165)

Stan Shebs // Wikicommons

#23. Napa County

– Index: 0.440
– Total population: 139,623
– White: 73.4% (102,467)
– Black or African American: 2.1% (2,883)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.9% (1,196)
– Asian: 8.1% (11,352)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (301)
– 2 or more races: 3.9% (5,380)
– Some other Race: 11.5% (16,044)

Public Domain

#22. Madera County

– Index: 0.473
– Total population: 155,433
– White: 69.5% (108,100)
– Black or African American: 3.2% (4,949)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 1.6% (2,489)
– Asian: 2.1% (3,229)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.1% (176)
– 2 or more races: 3.3% (5,061)
– Some other Race: 20.2% (31,429)

SD Dirk // Flickr

#21. San Diego County

– Index: 0.477
– Total population: 3.3 million
– White: 70.7% (2,345,667)
– Black or African American: 5.0% (166,750)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.7% (22,524)
– Asian: 11.9% (394,742)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.4% (13,867)
– 2 or more races: 5.2% (173,794)
– Some other Race: 6.0% (198,729)

Epolk // Wikimedia Commons

#20. Yolo County

– Index: 0.491
– Total population: 217,352
– White: 69.3% (150,617)
– Black or African American: 2.7% (5,847)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.6% (1,306)
– Asian: 14.0% (30,462)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.4% (955)
– 2 or more races: 6.3% (13,659)
– Some other Race: 6.7% (14,506)

Ray Bouknight // Wikicommons

#19. Sutter County

– Index: 0.492
– Total population: 96,109
– White: 69.0% (66,293)
– Black or African American: 1.9% (1,827)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.9% (878)
– Asian: 15.7% (15,048)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.6% (548)
– 2 or more races: 7.1% (6,785)
– Some other Race: 4.9% (4,730)

Cbl62 // Wikicommons

#18. Imperial County

– Index: 0.506
– Total population: 180,701
– White: 65.1% (117,658)
– Black or African American: 2.5% (4,489)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 1.1% (1,912)
– Asian: 1.5% (2,680)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (309)
– 2 or more races: 3.6% (6,514)
– Some other Race: 26.1% (47,139)

Armona // Wikicommons

#17. Kings County

– Index: 0.508
– Total population: 150,691
– White: 67.7% (102,062)
– Black or African American: 6.4% (9,642)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 1.6% (2,431)
– Asian: 3.9% (5,817)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (277)
– 2 or more races: 4.1% (6,143)
– Some other Race: 16.1% (24,319)

David Jordan // Wikicommons

#16. Fresno County

– Index: 0.542
– Total population: 984,521
– White: 65.0% (639,985)
– Black or African American: 4.8% (46,782)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 1.2% (11,656)
– Asian: 10.3% (101,857)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (1,620)
– 2 or more races: 4.1% (40,384)
– Some other Race: 14.4% (142,237)

Susan Popielaski // Wikimedia Commons

#15. Alpine County

– Index: 0.550
– Total population: 1,039
– White: 57.7% (599)
– Black or African American: 0.9% (9)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 34.0% (353)
– Asian: 1.0% (10)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.6% (6)
– 2 or more races: 5.1% (53)
– Some other Race: 0.9% (9)

Hollywood // Wikimedia Commons

#14. Orange County

– Index: 0.570
– Total population: 3.2 million
– White: 61.0% (1,931,263)
– Black or African American: 1.8% (55,591)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.5% (14,424)
– Asian: 20.5% (649,042)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.3% (10,152)
– 2 or more races: 4.1% (130,009)
– Some other Race: 11.9% (377,563)

Canva

#13. San Bernardino County

– Index: 0.581
– Total population: 2.1 million
– White: 61.2% (1,315,238)
– Black or African American: 8.3% (179,292)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.8% (17,782)
– Asian: 7.2% (154,332)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.3% (6,838)
– 2 or more races: 5.0% (106,949)
– Some other Race: 17.2% (368,600)

Daniel Orth // Flickr

#12. Riverside County

– Index: 0.584
– Total population: 2.4 million
– White: 59.9% (1,444,654)
– Black or African American: 6.5% (156,836)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.8% (19,765)
– Asian: 6.5% (157,261)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.3% (7,485)
– 2 or more races: 4.4% (106,316)
– Some other Race: 21.5% (519,122)

Naotake Murayama // Wikicommons

#11. Monterey County

– Index: 0.601
– Total population: 433,410
– White: 53.3% (230,992)
– Black or African American: 2.6% (11,367)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.7% (2,993)
– Asian: 5.6% (24,326)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.5% (2,135)
– 2 or more races: 4.3% (18,556)
– Some other Race: 33.0% (143,041)

Mark Miller // Wikimedia Commons

#10. Merced County

– Index: 0.604
– Total population: 271,382
– White: 55.1% (149,434)
– Black or African American: 3.2% (8,645)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.9% (2,501)
– Asian: 7.5% (20,349)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.2% (654)
– 2 or more races: 4.1% (11,064)
– Some other Race: 29.0% (78,735)

Canva

#9. Sacramento County

– Index: 0.625
– Total population: 1.5 million
– White: 57.3% (873,905)
– Black or African American: 9.8% (149,891)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.7% (10,111)
– Asian: 15.7% (239,447)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 1.1% (17,400)
– 2 or more races: 7.5% (113,877)
– Some other Race: 7.9% (119,922)

LPS.1 // Wikicommons

#8. San Joaquin County

– Index: 0.632
– Total population: 742,603
– White: 56.5% (419,288)
– Black or African American: 7.0% (51,931)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.6% (4,706)
– Asian: 15.6% (115,531)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.6% (4,565)
– 2 or more races: 10.9% (81,198)
– Some other Race: 8.8% (65,384)

MARELBU // Wikimedia Commons

#7. Contra Costa County

– Index: 0.636
– Total population: 1.1 million
– White: 55.8% (637,904)
– Black or African American: 8.7% (99,642)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.5% (5,506)
– Asian: 16.7% (190,983)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.5% (5,631)
– 2 or more races: 6.8% (77,956)
– Some other Race: 10.9% (124,629)

Craig Howell // Wikimedia Commons

#6. San Mateo County

– Index: 0.646
– Total population: 767,423
– White: 50.6% (388,318)
– Black or African American: 2.3% (17,784)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.4% (3,002)
– Asian: 28.7% (220,151)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 1.4% (10,366)
– 2 or more races: 5.7% (43,492)
– Some other Race: 11.0% (84,310)

Canva

#5. San Francisco County

– Index: 0.655
– Total population: 874,961
– White: 46.4% (406,056)
– Black or African American: 5.2% (45,556)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.4% (3,223)
– Asian: 34.4% (301,018)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.4% (3,188)
– 2 or more races: 5.6% (48,713)
– Some other Race: 7.7% (67,207)

Uladzik Kryhin // Shutterstock

#4. Santa Clara County

– Index: 0.655
– Total population: 1.9 million
– White: 44.5% (857,092)
– Black or African American: 2.5% (47,992)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.5% (9,697)
– Asian: 36.5% (702,881)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.4% (7,271)
– 2 or more races: 5.2% (100,143)
– Some other Race: 10.5% (202,394)

BDS2006 // Wikimedia

#3. Los Angeles County

– Index: 0.664
– Total population: 10.1 million
– White: 51.3% (5,168,443)
– Black or African American: 8.1% (820,478)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.7% (73,393)
– Asian: 14.6% (1,473,221)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.3% (27,720)
– 2 or more races: 4.0% (402,767)
– Some other Race: 21.0% (2,115,548)

Canva

#2. Solano County

– Index: 0.666
– Total population: 441,829
– White: 52.6% (232,437)
– Black or African American: 13.9% (61,526)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.5% (2,215)
– Asian: 15.4% (68,200)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.9% (4,101)
– 2 or more races: 7.5% (33,004)
– Some other Race: 9.1% (40,346)

Jennifer Williams // Wikimedia Commons

#1. Alameda County

– Index: 0.718
– Total population: 1.7 million
– White: 40.5% (670,364)
– Black or African American: 10.6% (175,751)
– American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.7% (11,120)
– Asian: 30.1% (499,382)
– Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander: 0.8% (13,900)
– 2 or more races: 6.5% (106,993)
– Some other Race: 10.8% (179,244)

Topics:

LA
LA

What common medical visits cost in California – and how they compare to nearby states

What common medical visits cost in California – and how they compare to nearby states
By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 15, 2021
By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 15, 2021

smolaw // Shutterstock

What common medical visits cost in California – and how they compare to nearby states

In the patchwork of health care providers in the United States, determining what a medical visit might cost can be confusing at best and life-altering at worst. The vast majority of patients who arrive at the hospital for a service recommended by their doctor do so without knowing the cost of that treatment. The price tag on most medical visits is so high for the uninsured, a full one-third of all money raised on GoFundMe is for health care costs.

A raft of legislation in nearly every state is set on tackling some of these endemic issues, with energy aimed squarely at lowering costs and expanding access. Some of this legislation is grand in scope, notably in states like New York where legislators are looking to put a public option on the table for residents there. Other states are taking a narrower approach, requiring providers to release price lists so patients are aware of what their care will cost.

Stacker analyzed cost data released on June 8, 2021, from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, common provider data from Verywell Health, and state zip codes from Simplemaps to find the average out-of-pocket cost for three typical medical visits in each state.

California

– Most common family practice visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $114.89 for established patients ($99.50 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $28.72 for established patients ($24.88 for new patients)
– Most common internal medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $114.89 for established patients ($147.83 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $28.72 for established patients ($36.96 for new patients)
– Most common pediatric medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $114.89 for established patients ($99.50 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $28.72 for established patients ($24.88 for new patients)

Health care costs could soon change dramatically for California residents. A current bill is considering a single-payer health system. In such a system, out-of-pocket costs for patients would be outright banned.

Some trends held steady across most states. For family practice and pediatric visits, new patients often pay less than established patients. For internal medicine visits, new patients frequently pay more than established patients. Both of these trends exist regardless of insurance type.

Transparency is increasingly paramount in American health care. Keep reading for a look at what common medical visits cost in neighboring states and the state-level factors that may influence these costs.

Oregon

– Most common family practice visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $100.62 for established patients ($86.82 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.16 for established patients ($21.71 for new patients)
– Most common internal medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $100.62 for established patients ($129.94 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.16 for established patients ($32.48 for new patients)
– Most common pediatric medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $100.62 for established patients ($86.82 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.16 for established patients ($21.71 for new patients)

In 2021, Oregon passed legislation intended to keep health care costs competitive. HB 3262 limits mergers and consolidations between insurers, theoretically making it more likely that a robust network of providers will compete against one another to lower prices.

Arizona

– Most common family practice visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $102.07 for established patients ($88.34 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.52 for established patients ($22.08 for new patients)
– Most common internal medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $102.07 for established patients ($132.23 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.52 for established patients ($33.06 for new patients)
– Most common pediatric medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $102.07 for established patients ($88.34 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.52 for established patients ($22.08 for new patients)

Arizonans looking for cost-saving advocacy from their representatives will need to look further than current Sen. Kyrsten Sinema. The Democrat has vocalized objections to lowering drug prices. Getting rid of this provision—which is currently in national legislation before Congress—could endanger a broader expansion of Medicare coverage.

Topics:

LA
NYC

What common medical visits cost in New York – and how they compare to nearby states

By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 15, 2021
By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 15, 2021

lenetstan // Shutterstock

What common medical visits cost in New York – and how they compare to nearby states

In the patchwork of health care providers in the United States, determining what a medical visit might cost can be confusing at best and life-altering at worst. The vast majority of patients who arrive at the hospital for a service recommended by their doctor do so without knowing the cost of that treatment. The price tag on most medical visits is so high for the uninsured, a full one-third of all money raised on GoFundMe is for health care costs.

A raft of legislation in nearly every state is set on tackling some of these endemic issues, with energy aimed squarely at lowering costs and expanding access. Some of this legislation is grand in scope, notably in states like New York where legislators are looking to put a public option on the table for residents there. Other states are taking a narrower approach, requiring providers to release price lists so patients are aware of what their care will cost.

Stacker analyzed cost data released on June 8, 2021, from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, common provider data from Verywell Health, and state zip codes from Simplemaps to find the average out-of-pocket cost for three typical medical visits in each state.

New York

– Most common family practice visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $101.86 for established patients ($88.06 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.46 for established patients ($22.02 for new patients)
– Most common internal medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $101.86 for established patients ($131.79 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.46 for established patients ($32.95 for new patients)
– Most common pediatric medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $101.86 for established patients ($88.06 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.46 for established patients ($22.02 for new patients)

A proposed New York Health Act, currently under consideration by lawmakers, could establish a robust single-payer system. All services requiring medical attention would be covered at zero cost to patients, eliminating the copayments and premiums that prohibit some residents from seeking care.

Some trends held steady across most states. For family practice and pediatric visits, new patients often pay less than established patients. For internal medicine visits, new patients frequently pay more than established patients. Both of these trends exist regardless of insurance type.

Transparency is increasingly paramount in American health care. Keep reading for a look at what common medical visits cost in neighboring states and the state-level factors that may influence these costs.

New Jersey

– Most common family practice visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $116.86 for established patients ($101.41 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $29.22 for established patients ($25.35 for new patients)
– Most common internal medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $116.86 for established patients ($150.57 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $29.22 for established patients ($37.64 for new patients)
– Most common pediatric medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $116.86 for established patients ($101.41 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $29.22 for established patients ($25.35 for new patients)

A major law protecting New Jersey residents from surprise billing will go into effect in 2022. The No Surprises Act will prohibit providers from billing unanticipated care costs from doctors and specialists who are out-of-network on an individual patient’s insurance plan.

Pennsylvania

– Most common family practice visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $101.62 for established patients ($87.96 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.41 for established patients ($21.99 for new patients)
– Most common internal medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $101.62 for established patients ($131.75 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.41 for established patients ($32.94 for new patients)
– Most common pediatric medicine visit costs
— Medicare recipients: $101.62 for established patients ($87.96 for new patients)
— Other insurance holders: $25.41 for established patients ($21.99 for new patients)

Pennsylvania lawmakers are moving forward with legislation that will make one facet of health care more affordable. A new bill aims to lower the cost of prescription drugs, which one in five state residents say they choose not to fill due to cost.

Topics:

NYC
NYC

See how many nurses New York will need by 2030

See how many nurses New York will need by 2030
By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 7, 2021
By Stacker Feed
3 min read • Published October 7, 2021

tetiana.photographer // Shutterstock

See how many nurses New York will need by 2030

A perfect storm of factors taken all together could leave the world short of almost 5.7 million nurses by 2030, according to forecasts by Becker’s Hospital Review.

Issues in the United States contributing to this shortage include the baby boomer generation reaching retirement age, an increased need for health care as our population gets older, a lack of qualified educators, and the COVID-19 pandemic. While every state is feeling the effects of these factors, their intensity—and the amount to which they’ll affect the nursing supply—varies immensely.

NursingEducation.org used data from the Health Resources and Services Administration’s Health Workforce Simulation Model, which is an integrated health professions projection model that estimates the current and future supply of and demand for health care providers. The 2017 model, which is the most recent available, looks at the demographics of current health care providers, current and projected population numbers, and the state of the national economy and the labor market.

For this story, the states were ranked by the projected surplus of registered nurses in 2030, which is the percent change between the projected supply of RNs and the projected demand. A positive percentage means there is a projected surplus of nurses in 2030, and a negative percentage means there is a projected shortage of nurses. Any ties are broken by the projected surplus of licensed practical nurses in 2030.

Keep reading to see where your state falls in the rankings and what’s being done to help amend the crisis—whether improving the student-to-professional pipeline or providing monetary incentives.

New York by the numbers

– Projected surplus of registered nurses in 2030: 9.3%
— 2030 projected demand for registered nurses: 195,200
— 2030 projected supply of registered nurses: 213,400
– Projected shortage of licensed practical nurses in 2030: 5.8%
— 2030 projected demand for licensed practical nurses: 62,500
— 2030 projected supply of licensed practical nurses: 58,900

New York is home to the largest nurses’ union in the country, a coalition of some 42,000 frontline workers. While the state still struggles to get a handle on its projected shortages, which have only worsened during the pandemic, the union offers support for over-stretched and burnt-out professionals. Nursing unions aren’t incredibly common in this country, so the fact that such a massive and powerful body exists may be a draw in and of itself.

Keep reading to see the states that will need nurses the most and least by 2030, or check out the full national story here.

States that will need nurses the most by 2030

#1. Alaska
– Projected shortage of registered nurses in 2030: 22.7%
#2. South Carolina
– Projected shortage of registered nurses in 2030: 16.6%
#3. South Dakota
– Projected shortage of registered nurses in 2030: 14.0%

States that will need nurses the least by 2030

#1. Washington D.C.
– Projected surplus of registered nurses in 2030: 282.6%
#2. Wyoming
– Projected surplus of registered nurses in 2030: 50.9%
#3. New Mexico
– Projected surplus of registered nurses in 2030: 44.9%

This story originally appeared on NursingEducation and was produced and distributed in partnership with Stacker Studio.

Topics:

NYC

Posts navigation

Older posts
Newer posts
Featured Jobs
Association for Computing Machinery
Executive Editor
Association for Computing Machinery
New York City, NY USA

Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission
Director of Communications
Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission
Yardley, PA

Hearst Television
Account Executive
Hearst Television
Array

All Jobs »
PREMIUM MEMBER

Seonaid "Sho Campbell

Livingston, MT
20 Years Experience
SUBJECTS: profiles, food and booze, quirky events, science, travel and lifestyle, architecture, BIO: I am a freelance writer and documentary...
View Full Profile »
Join Mediabistro Membership Today

Stand out from the crowd with a premium profile

Mediabistro Logo Find your next media job or showcase your creative talent
  • Job Search
  • Hot Jobs
  • Membership
  • Newsletter
  • Career Advice
  • Media News
  • Hiring Tips
  • Creative Tools
  • About
Facebook YouTube Instagram LinkedIn
Copyright © 2026 Mediabistro
  • Terms of Use
  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy