Zip Codes with the Highest Child Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in Raleigh, NC

RELATED REPORTS & OPTIONS

Highest Poverty | Girls 0-16
Population
Families and Households
Female Fertility
Female Fertility (Unmarried)
Race (Community Size)
Race (Percentage)
Ancestry (Community Size)
AfghanAfricanAlbanianAmericanApacheArabArgentineanArmenianAustralianAustrianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeChileanChippewaChoctawColombianCosta RicanCreekCroatianCubanCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDominicanDutchEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench CanadianGermanGhanaianGreekGuamanian / ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHonduranHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianPakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuerto RicanRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSenegaleseSerbianSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSpaniardSpanishSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSwedishSwissSyrianThaiTrinidadian and TobagonianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUkrainianUruguayanVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYugoslavian
Ancestry (Percentage)
AfghanAfricanAlbanianAmericanApacheArabArgentineanArmenianAustralianAustrianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeChileanChippewaChoctawColombianCosta RicanCreekCroatianCubanCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDominicanDutchEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench CanadianGermanGhanaianGreekGuamanian / ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHonduranHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianPakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuerto RicanRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSenegaleseSerbianSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSpaniardSpanishSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSwedishSwissSyrianThaiTrinidadian and TobagonianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUkrainianUruguayanVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYugoslavian
Immigrant Origin (Total)
AfghanistanAfricaArgentinaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBelarusBelgiumBelizeBrazilBulgariaBurma / MyanmarCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSierra LeoneSingaporeSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSwedenSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayVenezuelaVietnamWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabwe
Immigrant Origin (Percentage)
AfghanistanAfricaArgentinaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBelarusBelgiumBelizeBrazilBulgariaBurma / MyanmarCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSierra LeoneSingaporeSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSwedenSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayVenezuelaVietnamWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabwe
Income
Income (Families)
Income (Households)
Poverty
Poverty (Families)
Unemployment
Employment Occupations
Employment Industries
Employer Class
Commute Time
Commute Means
School Enrollment
Education by Degree Field
Occupancy
Finances
Physical Characteristics
Raleigh
Compare Zip Codes
Comparison Subject

Map of Zip Codes with the Highest Child Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in Raleigh

3.7%
35.1%
Zip Codes with the Highest Child Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in Raleigh Map

Zip Codes with the Highest Child Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in Raleigh, NC

Zip Code Child Poverty (Girls) vs State vs National
1. 27601 35.1% 19.2% (+16.0)#135 17.0% (+18.2)#4,347
2. 27610 30.8% 19.2% (+11.6)#173 17.0% (+13.8)#5,512
3. 27606 22.3% 19.2% (+3.15)#281 17.0% (+5.37)#8,683
4. 27604 14.4% 19.2% (-4.77)#418 17.0% (-2.56)#13,129
5. 27616 11.8% 19.2% (-7.35)#461 17.0% (-5.13)#14,889
6. 27609 11.0% 19.2% (-8.23)#472 17.0% (-6.01)#15,539
7. 27612 9.7% 19.2% (-9.45)#501 17.0% (-7.23)#16,448
8. 27603 9.3% 19.2% (-9.87)#511 17.0% (-7.65)#16,790
9. 27608 8.9% 19.2% (-10.3)#522 17.0% (-8.11)#17,145
10. 27614 5.5% 19.2% (-13.7)#577 17.0% (-11.5)#19,996
11. 27613 5.2% 19.2% (-14.0)#588 17.0% (-11.8)#20,241
12. 27615 5.1% 19.2% (-14.1)#589 17.0% (-11.8)#20,305
13. 27607 4.8% 19.2% (-14.4)#595 17.0% (-12.2)#20,650
14. 27617 3.7% 19.2% (-15.5)#615 17.0% (-13.3)#21,616

Common Questions

What are the Top 10 Zip Codes with the Highest Child Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in Raleigh, NC?
Top 10 Zip Codes with the Highest Child Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in Raleigh, NC are:
#1
35.1%
#2
30.8%
#3
22.3%
#4
14.4%
#5
11.8%
#6
11.0%
#7
9.7%
#8
9.3%
#9
8.9%
#10
5.5%
What zip code has the Highest Child Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in Raleigh, NC?
27601 has the Highest Child Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in Raleigh, NC with 35.1%.
What is the Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in Raleigh, NC?
Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in Raleigh is 14.8%.
What is the Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in North Carolina?
Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in North Carolina is 19.2%.
What is the Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in the United States?
Poverty Level Among Girls Under the Age of 16 in the United States is 17.0%.