Search for Indicators
All Data
Indicator Gauge Icon Legend
Legend Colors
Red is bad, green is good, blue is not statistically different/neutral.
Compared to Distribution
the value is in the best half of communities.
the value is in the 2nd worst quarter of communities.
the value is in the worst quarter of communities.
Compared to Target
meets target; 
does not meet target.
Compared to a Single Value
lower than the comparison value;
higher than the comparison value;
not statistically different from comparison value.
Trend
non-significant change over time; 
significant change over time; 
no change over time.
Compared to Prior Value
higher than the previous measurement period;
lower than the previous measurement period;
no statistically different change from previous measurement period.
County: Kings
Health / Alcohol & Drug Use
Value
Compared to:
County: Kings Adults who Binge Drink
County: Kings Adults who Binge Drink
19.7%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(16.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings Adults who Drink Excessively
County: Kings Adults who Drink Excessively
18.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,141 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(17.2%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(18.1%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(19.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Annual Opioid Prescription Rate
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Annual Opioid Prescription Rate
407.8
Prescriptions per 1,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(291.0)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(425.4)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Buprenorphine Prescription Rate
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Buprenorphine Prescription Rate
23.0
Prescriptions per 1,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(19.8)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(17.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to All Opioid Overdose
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to All Opioid Overdose
11.3
Rate per 100,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(18.7)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(10.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Fentanyl Overdose
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Fentanyl Overdose
9.3
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(16.6)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(6.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Heroin Overdose
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Heroin Overdose
0.0*
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
(2018)
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(1.2)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(0.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(4.2)
11.3
Rate per 100,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(18.1)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(9.4)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
9.8
Rate per 100,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(16.7)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(6.6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.9)
<div>IVP-22: Reduce overdose deaths involving synthetic opioids other than methadone</div>
15.3
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2020)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 48 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,303 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(16.5)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(23.5)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(15.2)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
County: Kings Age-Adjusted ED Visit Rate due to All Drug Overdose
County: Kings Age-Adjusted ED Visit Rate due to All Drug Overdose
157.5
Rate per 100,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(143.7)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(152.6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Age-Adjusted ED Visit Rate due to Heroin Overdose
County: Kings Age-Adjusted ED Visit Rate due to Heroin Overdose
13.9
Rate per 100,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(3.6)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(6.8)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
51.5
Rate per 100,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(54.9)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(9.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
44.0
Rate per 100,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(48.3)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(53.4)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Hospitalization Rate due to Heroin Overdose
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Hospitalization Rate due to Heroin Overdose
0.5
Rate per 100,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(0.7)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(1.2)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
8.7
Rate per 100,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(12.1)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(9.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
1.7
Per 100,000 population
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(1.2)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(1.8)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
1.7%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(1.3%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(1.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(1.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
3
People
(2021)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(10)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
6
People
(2021)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
13
People
(2021)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(16)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
10
People
(2021)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(20)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
44
People
(2021)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(33)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
7
People
(2021)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(14)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
14
People
(2021)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(9)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
County: Kings Number of Champions clients who use Grace Home services
County: Kings Number of Champions clients who use Grace Home services
15
People
(2021)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(19)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
41
People enrolled
(2021)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(41)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
0
People
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
Prior Value
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
156
People
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(147)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
County: Kings Number of Champions clients who use PE services
County: Kings Number of Champions clients who use PE services
219
People
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(210)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
153
People
(2021)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(94)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
County: Kings Opioid Prescription Patients
County: Kings Opioid Prescription Patients
2.6%
(Q3 2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
Prior Value
(2.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Quarterly Opioid Prescription Rate
County: Kings Quarterly Opioid Prescription Rate
300.8
Prescriptions per 10,000 population
(Q3 2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
Prior Value
(293.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
6.6
Residents on >90 MMEs of Opioids per 1,000 residents
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(6.3)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(7.1)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
12.3%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(3.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Teens who have Used Alcohol
County: Kings Teens who have Used Alcohol
40.5%
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
(2011-2012)
The distribution is based on data from 44 California counties and county groups.
CA Value
(23.1% in 2019-2021)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(30.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings
Health / Cancer
Value
Compared to:
County: Kings Adults with Cancer
County: Kings Adults with Cancer
4.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(7.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings Adults with Cancer (Non-Skin) or Melanoma
County: Kings Adults with Cancer (Non-Skin) or Melanoma
5.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(8.2%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Breast Cancer
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Breast Cancer
15.2
Deaths per 100,000 females
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 48 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,778 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(18.8)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(19.3)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(14.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(15.3)
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Cancer
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Cancer
137.9
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2020-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(122.0)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(146.0 in 2018-2022)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is National Cancer Institute
Prior Value
(136.6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(122.7)
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Colorectal Cancer
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Colorectal Cancer
12.9
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 53 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,180 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(12.0)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(12.9)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(11.9)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(8.9)
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Lung Cancer
29.9
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2020-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(20.6)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(32.4 in 2018-2022)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is National Cancer Institute
Prior Value
(26.6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(25.1)
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Prostate Cancer
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Prostate Cancer
18.8
Deaths per 100,000 males
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,612 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(20.2)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(19.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(15.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(16.9)
County: Kings Breast Cancer Incidence Rate
County: Kings Breast Cancer Incidence Rate
102.0
Cases per 100,000 females
(2017-2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 56 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,712 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(124.0)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(129.8)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(95.4)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Cancer: Medicare Population
County: Kings Cancer: Medicare Population
9.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(12.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(9.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Cervical Cancer Incidence Rate
County: Kings Cervical Cancer Incidence Rate
9.4
Cases per 100,000 females
(2017-2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 38 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 727 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(7.3)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(7.5)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(8.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Cervical Cancer Screening: 21-65
County: Kings Cervical Cancer Screening: 21-65
79.9%
(2020)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,141 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(82.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings Colon Cancer Screening: USPSTF Recommendation
County: Kings Colon Cancer Screening: USPSTF Recommendation
54.2%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(66.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate
County: Kings Colorectal Cancer Incidence Rate
25.8
Cases per 100,000 population
(2017-2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 56 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,613 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(33.5)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(36.4)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(26.8)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Households that Received Cancer Medical Services
County: Kings Households that Received Cancer Medical Services
7.4%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(7.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(8.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(7.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate
County: Kings Lung and Bronchus Cancer Incidence Rate
36.6
Cases per 100,000 population
(2017-2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 55 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,711 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(36.7)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(53.1)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(37.1)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Mammogram in Past 2 Years: 50-74
County: Kings Mammogram in Past 2 Years: 50-74
73.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(76.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
HP 2030 Target
(80.3%)
County: Kings Mammography Screening: Medicare Population
County: Kings Mammography Screening: Medicare Population
36.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,123 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(41.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(47.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(36.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Oral Cavity and Pharynx Cancer Incidence Rate
County: Kings Oral Cavity and Pharynx Cancer Incidence Rate
11.0
Cases per 100,000 population
(2017-2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 53 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 1,869 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(10.1)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(12.0)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(10.9)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Prostate Cancer Incidence Rate
County: Kings Prostate Cancer Incidence Rate
85.9
Cases per 100,000 males
(2017-2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 56 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,728 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(98.6)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(113.2)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(86.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings
Health / Children's Health
Value
Compared to:
County: Kings Child Mortality Rate: Under 20
County: Kings Child Mortality Rate: Under 20
45.4
Deaths per 100,000 population under 20
(2018-2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 51 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,038 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(37.7)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(50.6)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings
Health / Diabetes
Value
Compared to:
County: Kings Adults Who Bought Medications for Diabetes
County: Kings Adults Who Bought Medications for Diabetes
11.2%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(9.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(10.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(11.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Adults with Diabetes
County: Kings Adults with Diabetes
7.8%
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(10.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(11.5% in 2022)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
Prior Value
(8.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Diabetes
25.6
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2020-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 56 California counties.
CA Value
(23.6)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(24.8 in 2020)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Prior Value
(23.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Diabetes: Medicare Population
County: Kings Diabetes: Medicare Population
29.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(21.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(24.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(29.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings
Health / Disabilities
Value
Compared to:
County: Kings Adults with Disability Living in Poverty
County: Kings Adults with Disability Living in Poverty
19.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,132 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(22.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(24.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Children with a Disability
County: Kings Children with a Disability
3.6%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(3.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(4.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty
County: Kings Persons with a Cognitive Difficulty
5.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(4.6%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(5.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Persons with a Disability
County: Kings Persons with a Disability
12.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(12.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Persons with a Hearing Difficulty
County: Kings Persons with a Hearing Difficulty
3.5%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(2.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty
County: Kings Persons with a Self-Care Difficulty
2.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(2.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(2.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Persons with a Vision Difficulty
County: Kings Persons with a Vision Difficulty
2.3%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(2.1%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(2.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty
County: Kings Persons with an Ambulatory Difficulty
6.7%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(5.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(6.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Veterans with a Disability
County: Kings Veterans with a Disability
27.4%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(29.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(29.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings
Health / Family Planning
Value
Compared to:
58.2%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(44.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Kings County 2023 Target
(55.2%)
County: Kings Teen Birth Rate: 15-19
County: Kings Teen Birth Rate: 15-19
17.3
Live births per 1,000 females aged 15-19
(2020-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 55 California counties.
CA Value
(9.5)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(14.2)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics
Prior Value
(18.8)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings
Health / Health Care Access & Quality
Value
Compared to:
County: Kings Adults Delayed or had Difficulty Obtaining Care
County: Kings Adults Delayed or had Difficulty Obtaining Care
23.2%
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(24.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(22.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Adults who have had a Routine Checkup
County: Kings Adults who have had a Routine Checkup
66.6%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(76.1%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings Adults with Health Insurance: 18-64
County: Kings Adults with Health Insurance: 18-64
90.7%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,132 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(90.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(90.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Adults with HMO Health Insurance
County: Kings Adults with HMO Health Insurance
12.9%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(17.3%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(14.2%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(13.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
County: Kings Adults with Medicaid Health Insurance
County: Kings Adults with Medicaid Health Insurance
14.6%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(11.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(13.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Adults with Medicare Health Insurance
County: Kings Adults with Medicare Health Insurance
14.7%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(16.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(18.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(17.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Adults with Military Health Insurance
County: Kings Adults with Military Health Insurance
4.5%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(4.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(5.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Adults with Other Health Insurance
County: Kings Adults with Other Health Insurance
6.6%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(6.2%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(6.2%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(6.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Adults with POS Health Insurance
County: Kings Adults with POS Health Insurance
1.7%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(2.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(1.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(1.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Adults with PPO Health Insurance
County: Kings Adults with PPO Health Insurance
32.0%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(34.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(33.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(33.7%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Adults without Health Insurance
County: Kings Adults without Health Insurance
15.9%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(10.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings Children with Health Insurance
County: Kings Children with Health Insurance
95.9%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 42 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 828 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(96.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(94.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(96.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Households that Received Cardiology Medical Services
County: Kings Households that Received Cardiology Medical Services
10.5%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(10.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(11.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(10.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
28.5%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(26.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(28.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(29.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
25.3%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(26.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(25.9%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(25.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Households that Received Pediatric Medical Services
County: Kings Households that Received Pediatric Medical Services
12.0%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(11.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(10.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(11.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Non-Physician Primary Care Provider Rate
County: Kings Non-Physician Primary Care Provider Rate
92
Providers per 100,000 population
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(87)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(86)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings People Delayed or had Difficulty Obtaining Care
County: Kings People Delayed or had Difficulty Obtaining Care
12.5%
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(16.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(14.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(5.9%)
County: Kings People with a Usual Source of Health Care
County: Kings People with a Usual Source of Health Care
85.1%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(82.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(85.7%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Persons with Health Insurance
County: Kings Persons with Health Insurance
92.7%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,132 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(92.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(92.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(92.4%)
<div>AHS-01: Increase the proportion of people with health insurance <strong>(LEADING HEALTH INDICATOR)</strong></div>
County: Kings Persons with Private Health Insurance Only
County: Kings Persons with Private Health Insurance Only
46.7%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(53.5%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(54.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(48.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Persons with Public Health Insurance Only
County: Kings Persons with Public Health Insurance Only
37.1%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(29.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(24.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(36.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Preventable Hospital Stays: Medicare Population
County: Kings Preventable Hospital Stays: Medicare Population
2,474
Discharges per 100,000 Medicare enrollees
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(2,275)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(2,677)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(2,628)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Primary Care Provider Rate
County: Kings Primary Care Provider Rate
37
Providers per 100,000 population
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 57 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 2,984 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(81)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(38)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Respondents Who Are Able to Access Medical Services
County: Kings Respondents Who Are Able to Access Medical Services
92.2%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(94.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Kings County 2023 Target
(96.0%)
County: Kings Respondents who are Able to Access Telehealth Services
County: Kings Respondents who are Able to Access Telehealth Services
79.9%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(31.7%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
4.3%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(8.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
36.7%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(14.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
17.6%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(17.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
22.9%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(48.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
46.3%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(10.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
37.2%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(6.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
30.9%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(19.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
20.4%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(6.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
17.2%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(8.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
28.3%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(8.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
17.8%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(28.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
21.1%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(10.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
20.6%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(18.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
9.4%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(12.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
42.2%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(10.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
13.9%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(4.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
22.8%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(14.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
14.4%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(4.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
86.9%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(91.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Kings County 2023 Target
(87.0%)
County: Kings
Health / Health Information Technology
Value
Compared to:
28.5%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(33.1%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(31.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(32.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
County: Kings Households with a Smartphone
County: Kings Households with a Smartphone
85.0%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,141 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(86.7%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(84.7%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(84.4%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Households with an Internet Subscription
County: Kings Households with an Internet Subscription
86.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(91.6%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(88.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Households with One or More Types of Computing Devices
County: Kings Households with One or More Types of Computing Devices
93.8%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(95.9%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(94.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Persons with an Internet Subscription
County: Kings Persons with an Internet Subscription
89.1%
(2018-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(93.4%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(91.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
89.0%
(2023)
Compared to:
Prior Value
(94.2%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
Kings County 2023 Target
(70.7%)
County: Kings
Health / Heart Disease & Stroke
Value
Compared to:
County: Kings Adults Who Bought Medications for Cholesterol
County: Kings Adults Who Bought Medications for Cholesterol
15.3%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(15.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(17.1%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(15.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Adults who Experienced a Stroke
County: Kings Adults who Experienced a Stroke
3.4%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,133 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(3.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings Adults who Experienced Coronary Heart Disease
County: Kings Adults who Experienced Coronary Heart Disease
6.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,132 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(6.8%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
69.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,066 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(78.2%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings Adults Who Visited a Cardiologist
County: Kings Adults Who Visited a Cardiologist
10.9%
(2023)
Compared to:
CA Value
(12.4%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(13.2%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(12.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Adults with Heart Disease
County: Kings Adults with Heart Disease
6.7%
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
CA Value
(7.3%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(6.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
40.5
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2020-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(37.0)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(38.8 in 2020)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Prior Value
(44.3)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(33.4)
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Coronary Heart Disease
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Coronary Heart Disease
99.7
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2020-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(77.2)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(91.8 in 2020)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Prior Value
(104.7)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(71.1)
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Heart Attack
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Heart Attack
49.7
Deaths per 100,000 population 35+ years
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,101 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(44.3)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(57.5)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Atrial Fibrillation: Medicare Population
County: Kings Atrial Fibrillation: Medicare Population
10.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(13.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(14.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(10.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Cholesterol Test History
County: Kings Cholesterol Test History
79.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,066 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(86.4%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings Heart Failure: Medicare Population
County: Kings Heart Failure: Medicare Population
16.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(10.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(11.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(16.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings High Blood Pressure Prevalence
County: Kings High Blood Pressure Prevalence
34.8%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
CA Value
(34.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(32.4% in 2021)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
Prior Value
(22.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
HP 2030 Target
(41.9%)
County: Kings High Cholesterol Prevalence
County: Kings High Cholesterol Prevalence
32.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,066 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(35.5%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings High Cholesterol Prevalence: Past 5 Years
County: Kings High Cholesterol Prevalence: Past 5 Years
27.7%
(2019)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,121 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
US Value
(33.6%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
County: Kings Hyperlipidemia: Medicare Population
County: Kings Hyperlipidemia: Medicare Population
64.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(61.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(65.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(62.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Hypertension: Medicare Population
County: Kings Hypertension: Medicare Population
68.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(58.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(65.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(68.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Ischemic Heart Disease: Medicare Population
County: Kings Ischemic Heart Disease: Medicare Population
24.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(18.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(21.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(23.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Stroke: Medicare Population
County: Kings Stroke: Medicare Population
5.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(5.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(6.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(5.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings
Health / Immunizations & Infectious Diseases
Value
Compared to:
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Influenza and Pneumonia
County: Kings Age-Adjusted Death Rate due to Influenza and Pneumonia
12.5
Deaths per 100,000 population
(2020-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 56 California counties.
CA Value
(10.9)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(13.0 in 2020)
The regional value is compared to the national value. The source for the national value is Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Prior Value
(12.6)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings COVID-19 Daily Average Case-Fatality Rate
County: Kings COVID-19 Daily Average Case-Fatality Rate
5.1
Deaths per 100 cases
(Mar 3, 2023)
Compared to:
CA Counties
(Feb 3, 2023)
The distribution is based on data from 56 California counties.
U.S. Counties
(Mar 25, 2022)
The distribution is based on data from 2,811 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(1.0)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(1.7)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(6.0)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings COVID-19 Daily Average Incidence Rate
County: Kings COVID-19 Daily Average Incidence Rate
5.50
Cases per 100,000 population
(Mar 3, 2023)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,142 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(6.23)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(10.97)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(7.84)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Flu Vaccinations: Medicare Population
County: Kings Flu Vaccinations: Medicare Population
37.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(48.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(50.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(37.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Kindergartners with Required Immunizations
County: Kings Kindergartners with Required Immunizations
96.1%
(2021-2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 56 California counties.
CA Value
(92.8%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
Prior Value
(97.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Persons Fully Vaccinated Against COVID-19
County: Kings Persons Fully Vaccinated Against COVID-19
52.7%
(May 10, 2023)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 50 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,125 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Prior Value
(52.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
County: Kings Pneumonia Vaccinations: Medicare Population
County: Kings Pneumonia Vaccinations: Medicare Population
6.0%
(2022)
Compared to:
CA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 58 California counties.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,129 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
CA Value
(8.0%)
The regional value is compared to the California state value.
US Value
(8.0%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.
Prior Value
(5.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were not taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.
4.4%
(2023)
Compared to:
No Comparison Data Available
(0%)
3.5%
(2023)
Compared to:
No Comparison Data Available
(0%)
