Cities with the Highest Percentage of Population Working from Home in Oklahoma

RELATED REPORTS & OPTIONS

Work from Home
Population
Families and Households
Female Fertility
Female Fertility (Unmarried)
Race (Community Size)
Race (Percentage)
Ancestry (Community Size)
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian / Chaldean / SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian / ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Ancestry (Percentage)
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian / Chaldean / SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian / ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigrant Origin (Total)
AfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaAzoresBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma / MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabwe
Immigrant Origin (Percentage)
AfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaAzoresBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma / MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern 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
Oklahoma
Compare Cities
Comparison Subject

Map of Cities with the Highest Percentage of Population Working from Home in Oklahoma

0.0%
80.0%
Cities with the Highest Percentage of Population Working from Home in Oklahoma Map

Cities with the Highest Percentage of Population Working from Home in Oklahoma

City % Work from Home vs State vs National
1. Savanna 71.3% 43.8% (+27.5)#1 44.0% (+27.3)#108
2. Terlton 70.5% 43.8% (+26.7)#2 44.0% (+26.5)#142
3. Wilson 68.5% 43.8% (+24.7)#3 44.0% (+24.5)#232
4. Medicine Park 67.2% 43.8% (+23.4)#4 44.0% (+23.2)#311
5. Cleora 66.7% 43.8% (+22.9)#5 44.0% (+22.7)#339
6. Schulter 66.0% 43.8% (+22.2)#6 44.0% (+22.0)#400
7. Carnegie 65.7% 43.8% (+21.9)#7 44.0% (+21.7)#415
8. Clinton 65.3% 43.8% (+21.5)#8 44.0% (+21.3)#457
9. Kansas 64.5% 43.8% (+20.7)#9 44.0% (+20.5)#546
10. Vici 64.3% 43.8% (+20.5)#10 44.0% (+20.3)#589
11. Erick 64.2% 43.8% (+20.4)#11 44.0% (+20.2)#604
12. Arnett 63.6% 43.8% (+19.8)#12 44.0% (+19.6)#684
13. Delaware 63.5% 43.8% (+19.7)#13 44.0% (+19.5)#702
14. Taylor Ferry 63.4% 43.8% (+19.6)#14 44.0% (+19.4)#724
15. Corn 63.1% 43.8% (+19.3)#15 44.0% (+19.1)#790
16. Cyril 62.7% 43.8% (+18.9)#16 44.0% (+18.7)#833
17. Disney 62.5% 43.8% (+18.7)#17 44.0% (+18.5)#884
18. Forest Park 62.4% 43.8% (+18.6)#18 44.0% (+18.4)#901
19. Liberty 62.3% 43.8% (+18.5)#19 44.0% (+18.3)#932
20. Snyder 61.8% 43.8% (+18.0)#20 44.0% (+17.8)#1,013
21. Maysville 61.5% 43.8% (+17.7)#21 44.0% (+17.5)#1,074
22. Antlers 61.2% 43.8% (+17.4)#22 44.0% (+17.2)#1,165
23. Mooreland 61.2% 43.8% (+17.4)#23 44.0% (+17.2)#1,174
24. Piedmont 60.7% 43.8% (+16.9)#24 44.0% (+16.7)#1,270
25. Locust Grove 60.5% 43.8% (+16.7)#25 44.0% (+16.5)#1,312
26. Randlett 60.4% 43.8% (+16.6)#26 44.0% (+16.4)#1,363
27. Paden 60.3% 43.8% (+16.5)#27 44.0% (+16.3)#1,402
28. Bray 60.2% 43.8% (+16.4)#28 44.0% (+16.2)#1,422
29. Hobart 60.1% 43.8% (+16.3)#29 44.0% (+16.1)#1,449
30. Dewar 60.0% 43.8% (+16.2)#30 44.0% (+16.0)#1,486
31. Cedar Lake 60.0% 43.8% (+16.2)#31 44.0% (+16.0)#1,491
32. Thomas 59.8% 43.8% (+16.0)#32 44.0% (+15.8)#1,513
33. Cleveland 59.6% 43.8% (+15.8)#33 44.0% (+15.6)#1,545
34. Lequire 59.5% 43.8% (+15.7)#34 44.0% (+15.5)#1,624
35. Texhoma 59.1% 43.8% (+15.3)#35 44.0% (+15.1)#1,746
36. Katie 59.1% 43.8% (+15.3)#36 44.0% (+15.1)#1,754
37. Bluejacket 59.0% 43.8% (+15.2)#37 44.0% (+15.0)#1,790
38. Laverne 58.5% 43.8% (+14.7)#38 44.0% (+14.5)#1,901
39. Atwood 58.4% 43.8% (+14.6)#39 44.0% (+14.4)#1,943
40. Pawhuska 58.1% 43.8% (+14.3)#40 44.0% (+14.1)#2,046
41. Pond Creek 58.1% 43.8% (+14.3)#41 44.0% (+14.1)#2,061
42. Welling 57.8% 43.8% (+14.0)#42 44.0% (+13.8)#2,143
43. Burbank 57.5% 43.8% (+13.7)#43 44.0% (+13.5)#2,252
44. Lake Aluma 57.5% 43.8% (+13.7)#44 44.0% (+13.5)#2,253
45. Tryon 57.3% 43.8% (+13.5)#45 44.0% (+13.3)#2,331
46. Bernice 57.0% 43.8% (+13.2)#46 44.0% (+13.0)#2,462
47. Davis 56.8% 43.8% (+13.0)#47 44.0% (+12.8)#2,493
48. Bushyhead 56.7% 43.8% (+12.9)#48 44.0% (+12.7)#2,532
49. Grove 56.6% 43.8% (+12.8)#49 44.0% (+12.6)#2,543
50. Haskell 56.5% 43.8% (+12.7)#50 44.0% (+12.5)#2,591
51. Elmore City 56.5% 43.8% (+12.7)#51 44.0% (+12.5)#2,605
52. Ramona 56.5% 43.8% (+12.7)#52 44.0% (+12.5)#2,608
53. Prue 56.5% 43.8% (+12.7)#53 44.0% (+12.5)#2,624
54. Lehigh 56.5% 43.8% (+12.7)#54 44.0% (+12.5)#2,633
55. Oologah 55.9% 43.8% (+12.1)#55 44.0% (+11.9)#2,864
56. Tupelo 55.5% 43.8% (+11.7)#56 44.0% (+11.5)#3,031
57. Carney 55.4% 43.8% (+11.6)#57 44.0% (+11.4)#3,082
58. Canute 55.2% 43.8% (+11.4)#58 44.0% (+11.2)#3,175
59. Whitehorn Cove 55.1% 43.8% (+11.3)#59 44.0% (+11.1)#3,208
60. Kingston 54.8% 43.8% (+11.0)#60 44.0% (+10.8)#3,302
61. Chickasha 54.6% 43.8% (+10.8)#61 44.0% (+10.6)#3,361
62. Haileyville 54.5% 43.8% (+10.7)#62 44.0% (+10.5)#3,442
63. Achille 54.5% 43.8% (+10.7)#63 44.0% (+10.5)#3,450
64. Vinita 54.3% 43.8% (+10.5)#64 44.0% (+10.3)#3,529
65. Millerton 54.3% 43.8% (+10.5)#65 44.0% (+10.3)#3,569
66. Reydon 54.3% 43.8% (+10.5)#66 44.0% (+10.3)#3,572
67. Wetumka 54.0% 43.8% (+10.2)#67 44.0% (+10.0)#3,678
68. Elk City 53.6% 43.8% (+9.80)#68 44.0% (+9.60)#3,803
69. Woodall 53.6% 43.8% (+9.80)#69 44.0% (+9.60)#3,834
70. Bokoshe 53.5% 43.8% (+9.70)#70 44.0% (+9.50)#3,897
71. Blackwell 53.3% 43.8% (+9.50)#71 44.0% (+9.30)#3,988
72. Lawrence Creek 53.3% 43.8% (+9.50)#72 44.0% (+9.30)#4,063
73. Shady Grove Cdp Cherokee County 53.1% 43.8% (+9.30)#73 44.0% (+9.10)#4,153
74. Cookson 52.9% 43.8% (+9.10)#74 44.0% (+8.90)#4,231
75. Foster 52.8% 43.8% (+9.00)#75 44.0% (+8.80)#4,289
76. Brent 52.7% 43.8% (+8.90)#76 44.0% (+8.70)#4,334
77. Oakhurst 52.6% 43.8% (+8.80)#77 44.0% (+8.60)#4,365
78. Justice 52.5% 43.8% (+8.70)#78 44.0% (+8.50)#4,410
79. Gene Autry 52.5% 43.8% (+8.70)#79 44.0% (+8.50)#4,471
80. Tonkawa 52.3% 43.8% (+8.50)#80 44.0% (+8.30)#4,556
81. Dickson 52.3% 43.8% (+8.50)#81 44.0% (+8.30)#4,571
82. Gracemont 52.3% 43.8% (+8.50)#82 44.0% (+8.30)#4,601
83. Mccord 52.2% 43.8% (+8.40)#83 44.0% (+8.20)#4,638
84. Blanchard 52.0% 43.8% (+8.20)#84 44.0% (+8.00)#4,733
85. East Duke 52.0% 43.8% (+8.20)#85 44.0% (+8.00)#4,761
86. Roland 51.7% 43.8% (+7.90)#86 44.0% (+7.70)#4,889
87. Central High 51.6% 43.8% (+7.80)#87 44.0% (+7.60)#4,950
88. Cedar Valley 51.6% 43.8% (+7.80)#88 44.0% (+7.60)#4,963
89. Longtown 51.5% 43.8% (+7.70)#89 44.0% (+7.50)#4,997
90. New Cordell 51.5% 43.8% (+7.70)#90 44.0% (+7.50)#4,999
91. Drumright 51.5% 43.8% (+7.70)#91 44.0% (+7.50)#5,004
92. Meeker 51.5% 43.8% (+7.70)#92 44.0% (+7.50)#5,021
93. Hydro 51.5% 43.8% (+7.70)#93 44.0% (+7.50)#5,026
94. Goodwell 51.4% 43.8% (+7.60)#94 44.0% (+7.40)#5,106
95. Collinsville 51.2% 43.8% (+7.40)#95 44.0% (+7.20)#5,218
96. Prague 51.1% 43.8% (+7.30)#96 44.0% (+7.10)#5,307
97. Langston 51.0% 43.8% (+7.20)#97 44.0% (+7.00)#5,367
98. Bridge Creek 51.0% 43.8% (+7.20)#98 44.0% (+7.00)#5,384
99. Ponca City 50.7% 43.8% (+6.90)#99 44.0% (+6.70)#5,518
100. Hammon 50.7% 43.8% (+6.90)#100 44.0% (+6.70)#5,574

Common Questions

What are the Top 10 Cities with the Highest Percentage of Population Working from Home in Oklahoma?
Top 10 Cities with the Highest Percentage of Population Working from Home in Oklahoma are:
#1
71.3%
#2
70.5%
#3
68.5%
#4
67.2%
#5
66.7%
#6
66.0%
#7
65.7%
#8
65.3%
#9
64.5%
#10
64.3%
What city has the Highest Percentage of Population Working from Home in Oklahoma?
Savanna has the Highest Percentage of Population Working from Home in Oklahoma with 71.3%.
What is the Percentage of Population Working from Home in the State of Oklahoma?
Percentage of Population Working from Home in Oklahoma is 43.8%.
What is the Percentage of Population Working from Home in the United States?
Percentage of Population Working from Home in the United States is 44.0%.