Return to Home Mortality > Table

Death Rates Table

Data Options
Comparison Options

Death Rate Report for Illinois by County

All Cancer Sites, 2019-2023

All Races (includes Hispanic), Both Sexes, Ages 65+

Sorted by Recentaapc

County
 sort alphabetically by name ascending
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
 sort by rural urban descending
Met Healthy People Objective of 122.7?
Age-Adjusted Death Rate
deaths per 100,000
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by rate descending
CI*Rank ⋔
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by CI rank descending
Average Annual Count
 sort by count descending
Recent Trend
Recent 5-Year Trend in Death Rates
(95% Confidence Interval)
 sort by trend descending
Illinois N/A No 881.3 (875.4, 887.2) N/A 17,579 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.9, -1.5)
United States N/A No 846.2 (845.1, 847.3) N/A 447,280 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.7, -1.3)
Kankakee County Urban No 966.7 (902.6, 1,034.1) 47 (19, 84) 172 falling falling trend -3.6 (-7.6, -1.7)
Putnam County Rural No 848.0 (634.7, 1,110.1) 89 (4, 102) 10 falling falling trend -2.6 (-5.0, -0.4)
Cook County Urban No 830.1 (820.9, 839.4) 94 (80, 97) 6,385 falling falling trend -2.5 (-2.8, -2.2)
Johnson County Rural No 844.4 (692.2, 1,020.3) 92 (12, 102) 21 falling falling trend -2.1 (-3.9, -0.3)
Brown County Rural No 861.1 (610.0, 1,180.0) 85 (2, 102) 7 stable stable trend -1.7 (-4.5, 0.9)
Bureau County Rural No 901.2 (806.2, 1,004.2) 77 (19, 100) 66 falling falling trend -1.7 (-2.6, -0.9)
DuPage County Urban No 792.1 (771.5, 813.1) 100 (87, 101) 1,149 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.9, -1.4)
McHenry County Urban No 947.0 (906.4, 988.9) 59 (31, 80) 425 falling falling trend -1.7 (-1.9, -1.4)
Bond County Urban No 1,004.2 (846.0, 1,183.0) 33 (2, 100) 29 stable stable trend -1.6 (-3.3, 0.0)
Lake County Urban No 836.2 (810.8, 862.2) 93 (75, 98) 840 falling falling trend -1.6 (-1.9, -1.3)
Hancock County Rural No 797.2 (679.2, 929.8) 99 (35, 102) 32 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.6, -0.4)
Kane County Urban No 821.3 (791.5, 852.0) 96 (77, 100) 586 falling falling trend -1.5 (-1.8, -1.2)
McDonough County Rural No 850.0 (737.3, 974.9) 87 (23, 102) 41 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.6, -0.5)
White County Rural No 917.5 (772.9, 1,080.8) 70 (6, 102) 29 falling falling trend -1.5 (-2.8, -0.3)
Adams County Rural No 904.1 (832.3, 980.4) 75 (30, 98) 119 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.4, -0.5)
Calhoun County Urban No 1,116.2 (850.9, 1,438.0) 10 (1, 101) 12 stable stable trend -1.4 (-4.0, 1.0)
Marshall County Urban No 820.4 (673.7, 989.5) 97 (20, 102) 22 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.1, 0.3)
Sangamon County Urban No 893.4 (849.0, 939.5) 80 (43, 93) 311 falling falling trend -1.4 (-1.9, -0.9)
Schuyler County Rural No 661.5 (491.7, 870.6) 102 (45, 102) 10 stable stable trend -1.4 (-3.4, 0.5)
Washington County Rural No 797.3 (654.6, 961.4) 98 (21, 102) 22 falling falling trend -1.4 (-2.4, -0.5)
Gallatin County Rural No 927.5 (700.1, 1,205.6) 67 (2, 102) 11 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.7, -0.1)
Henry County Urban No 916.8 (834.1, 1,005.3) 72 (22, 98) 91 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.1, -0.5)
Kendall County Urban No 871.1 (800.1, 946.8) 82 (38, 100) 115 falling falling trend -1.3 (-2.0, -0.5)
Macon County Urban No 982.2 (922.1, 1,045.3) 41 (18, 80) 202 stable stable trend -1.3 (-7.2, 0.1)
St. Clair County Urban No 951.3 (908.3, 995.8) 54 (28, 81) 379 falling falling trend -1.3 (-1.7, -0.9)
Cass County Rural No 923.5 (749.4, 1,125.7) 69 (3, 102) 20 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.5, -0.1)
Coles County Rural No 932.6 (840.4, 1,032.1) 64 (16, 97) 76 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.2, -0.1)
Grundy County Urban No 1,095.7 (988.9, 1,210.9) 15 (2, 70) 78 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.9, -0.5)
Jo Daviess County Rural No 845.7 (745.6, 955.4) 90 (32, 102) 52 falling falling trend -1.2 (-2.1, -0.2)
Monroe County Urban No 827.6 (728.1, 936.7) 95 (34, 102) 51 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.4)
Peoria County Urban No 949.2 (900.8, 999.4) 55 (27, 81) 294 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.6, -0.7)
Will County Urban No 925.0 (896.6, 954.1) 68 (42, 81) 826 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.5, -1.0)
Williamson County Rural No 915.1 (841.1, 993.8) 73 (25, 96) 114 falling falling trend -1.2 (-1.8, -0.6)
Boone County Urban No 870.0 (780.9, 966.4) 83 (27, 101) 71 stable stable trend -1.1 (-2.1, 0.0)
Carroll County Rural No 975.5 (837.3, 1,129.9) 44 (4, 100) 36 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.1, -0.1)
Christian County Rural No 969.9 (865.0, 1,084.0) 46 (7, 94) 62 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.9, -0.3)
Perry County Rural No 899.2 (772.2, 1,041.1) 78 (11, 102) 36 falling falling trend -1.1 (-2.1, -0.2)
Tazewell County Urban No 953.0 (898.9, 1,009.5) 53 (26, 84) 234 falling falling trend -1.1 (-1.8, -0.3)
Champaign County Urban No 788.8 (740.9, 839.1) 101 (78, 102) 208 stable stable trend -1.0 (-1.6, 1.1)
Clinton County Urban No 875.2 (773.6, 986.2) 81 (22, 102) 55 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.0, 0.0)
Edwards County Rural No 978.6 (753.7, 1,249.2) 42 (2, 102) 13 stable stable trend -1.0 (-3.8, 1.5)
Franklin County Rural No 1,123.5 (1,017.7, 1,237.3) 9 (2, 53) 83 falling falling trend -1.0 (-2.1, -0.1)
Lee County Rural No 1,004.1 (900.1, 1,116.8) 34 (6, 89) 69 stable stable trend -1.0 (-2.3, 0.2)
McLean County Urban No 866.1 (812.0, 922.7) 84 (50, 99) 196 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.5, -0.4)
Winnebago County Urban No 946.1 (907.7, 985.8) 60 (33, 78) 463 falling falling trend -1.0 (-1.4, -0.6)
Madison County Urban No 961.5 (921.2, 1,003.1) 49 (27, 77) 436 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.2, -0.5)
Menard County Urban No 947.4 (776.5, 1,144.7) 57 (3, 102) 22 stable stable trend -0.9 (-2.1, 0.5)
Montgomery County Rural No 1,024.3 (909.3, 1,149.5) 26 (4, 86) 59 falling falling trend -0.9 (-1.7, -0.1)
Randolph County Rural No 949.1 (842.1, 1,065.6) 56 (10, 98) 58 stable stable trend -0.9 (-1.9, 0.1)
Richland County Rural No 976.6 (830.3, 1,141.1) 43 (4, 100) 32 stable stable trend -0.9 (-4.0, 0.2)
Jackson County Rural No 917.1 (826.2, 1,015.2) 71 (20, 99) 76 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.6, 0.0)
Rock Island County Urban No 907.8 (857.8, 960.0) 74 (39, 92) 249 falling falling trend -0.8 (-1.1, -0.5)
Wayne County Rural No 903.0 (767.5, 1,055.6) 76 (9, 102) 31 stable stable trend -0.8 (-1.9, 0.3)
Cumberland County Rural No 845.5 (674.0, 1,046.9) 91 (9, 102) 17 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.3, 0.8)
Hamilton County Rural No 960.8 (764.5, 1,192.0) 50 (2, 102) 16 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.5, 1.0)
La Salle County Rural No 1,047.0 (984.4, 1,112.5) 23 (8, 57) 212 falling falling trend -0.7 (-1.2, -0.3)
Morgan County Rural No 990.1 (885.3, 1,103.8) 39 (6, 91) 65 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.5, 0.0)
Ogle County Rural No 939.1 (853.8, 1,030.5) 63 (17, 94) 89 stable stable trend -0.7 (-1.4, 0.0)
Pope County Rural No 860.2 (630.3, 1,146.3) 86 (2, 102) 9 stable stable trend -0.7 (-3.3, 2.1)
Stark County Urban No 1,018.1 (775.7, 1,312.3) 32 (1, 102) 12 stable stable trend -0.7 (-2.4, 0.9)
Douglas County Rural No 955.7 (815.0, 1,113.3) 51 (4, 101) 33 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.7, 0.5)
Effingham County Rural No 939.9 (832.5, 1,057.3) 62 (12, 98) 56 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.6, 0.5)
Fayette County Rural No 992.3 (857.1, 1,142.8) 37 (3, 98) 39 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.8, 0.6)
Knox County Rural No 1,025.0 (940.3, 1,115.3) 25 (6, 76) 109 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.3, 0.2)
Livingston County Rural No 928.8 (828.4, 1,038.0) 66 (12, 99) 63 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.4, 0.3)
Massac County Urban No 974.0 (821.7, 1,146.0) 45 (4, 101) 29 stable stable trend -0.6 (-2.1, 0.9)
Saline County Rural No 1,102.5 (972.0, 1,245.5) 13 (2, 73) 52 stable stable trend -0.6 (-1.8, 0.5)
Clay County Rural No 1,051.5 (880.3, 1,245.8) 22 (1, 98) 27 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.9, 0.9)
Greene County Rural No 1,178.7 (989.9, 1,393.1) 4 (1, 81) 28 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.9, 0.9)
Macoupin County Urban No 942.0 (853.9, 1,036.7) 61 (16, 94) 85 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.2, 0.2)
Stephenson County Rural No 897.9 (817.2, 984.3) 79 (27, 99) 93 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.1, 0.2)
Woodford County Urban No 849.9 (754.8, 953.6) 88 (31, 102) 59 stable stable trend -0.5 (-1.3, 0.4)
Edgar County Rural No 1,043.1 (904.3, 1,197.1) 24 (2, 92) 41 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.6, 0.9)
Jasper County Rural No 963.9 (773.7, 1,186.5) 48 (2, 102) 18 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.9, 1.1)
Piatt County Urban No 930.6 (788.0, 1,091.4) 65 (6, 102) 30 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.5, 0.7)
Union County Rural No 1,022.1 (880.4, 1,180.3) 30 (2, 96) 37 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.4, 0.6)
Wabash County Rural No 1,020.6 (845.0, 1,221.5) 31 (2, 101) 24 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.6, 0.7)
Whiteside County Rural No 997.0 (916.1, 1,083.1) 35 (10, 83) 113 stable stable trend -0.4 (-1.1, 0.4)
DeKalb County Urban No 994.5 (918.2, 1,075.4) 36 (10, 82) 128 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.9, 0.3)
Scott County Rural No 991.9 (729.5, 1,317.1) 38 (1, 102) 9 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.4, 1.9)
Shelby County Rural No 1,023.6 (899.2, 1,160.3) 27 (3, 93) 49 stable stable trend -0.3 (-2.0, 1.3)
Vermilion County Rural No 1,072.5 (997.1, 1,152.0) 18 (4, 53) 152 stable stable trend -0.3 (-0.9, 0.3)
Hardin County Rural No 1,169.1 (874.1, 1,532.3) 5 (1, 101) 10 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.9, 1.7)
Iroquois County Rural No 1,022.3 (909.0, 1,145.7) 29 (4, 90) 59 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.0, 0.7)
Lawrence County Rural No 947.3 (790.5, 1,126.0) 58 (4, 102) 26 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.7, 1.2)
Marion County Rural No 1,051.8 (947.4, 1,164.5) 21 (3, 79) 75 stable stable trend -0.2 (-1.4, 0.9)
Mason County Rural No 1,092.3 (927.0, 1,278.3) 17 (1, 90) 31 stable stable trend -0.1 (-1.7, 1.5)
Clark County Rural No 1,023.4 (864.7, 1,202.7) 28 (2, 98) 30 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.3, 1.5)
Crawford County Rural No 1,063.7 (915.3, 1,229.2) 20 (2, 91) 37 stable stable trend 0.1 (-1.1, 1.3)
Fulton County Rural No 1,155.5 (1,042.6, 1,277.2) 6 (1, 45) 77 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.7, 0.8)
Logan County Rural No 1,142.5 (1,016.4, 1,279.8) 7 (1, 59) 60 stable stable trend 0.1 (-0.9, 1.0)
Mercer County Urban No 985.0 (837.3, 1,151.1) 40 (3, 100) 32 stable stable trend 0.2 (-0.9, 1.3)
Pulaski County Rural No 1,225.8 (945.8, 1,563.3) 2 (1, 97) 13 stable stable trend 0.2 (-1.8, 2.2)
Moultrie County Rural No 1,096.5 (922.1, 1,293.8) 14 (1, 93) 28 stable stable trend 0.3 (-1.2, 1.9)
Ford County Urban No 1,191.4 (1,004.8, 1,402.0) 3 (1, 78) 29 stable stable trend 0.5 (-0.6, 1.5)
Jersey County Urban No 1,110.8 (970.0, 1,266.2) 11 (2, 77) 45 stable stable trend 0.5 (-0.5, 1.5)
Pike County Rural No 1,128.2 (966.3, 1,309.1) 8 (1, 84) 35 stable stable trend 0.6 (-3.2, 6.7)
Alexander County Urban No 1,555.6 (1,250.0, 1,913.1) 1 (1, 31) 18 stable stable trend 0.8 (-1.2, 2.6)
Henderson County Rural No 953.4 (754.5, 1,188.1) 52 (2, 102) 16 stable stable trend 1.1 (-1.1, 11.8)
Warren County Rural No 1,092.9 (935.9, 1,268.6) 16 (1, 87) 35 stable stable trend 1.4 (-0.5, 10.0)
Jefferson County Rural No 1,072.4 (965.4, 1,188.0) 19 (3, 72) 74 stable stable trend 2.8 (-0.5, 9.0)
De Witt County Rural No 1,108.7 (942.1, 1,296.0) 12 (1, 92) 32 stable stable trend 9.0 (-1.2, 17.5)

Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 03/21/2026 6:01 am.

State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.

Trend
Rising when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change is above 0.
Stable when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change includes 0.
Falling when 95% confidence interval of average annual percent change is below 0.


† Death data provided by the National Vital Statistics System public use data file. Death rates calculated by the National Cancer Institute using SEER*Stat. Death rates are age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population (20 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85-89, 90+).

The Healthy People 2030 goals are based on rates adjusted using different methods but the differences should be minimal.

Population counts for denominators are based on Census populations as modified by NCI.

The US Population Data File is used with mortality data.

‡ The Average Annual Percent Change (AAPC) is based on the APCs calculated by Joinpoint. Due to data availability issues, the time period used in the calculation of the joinpoint regression model may differ for selected counties.

⋔ Results presented with the CI*Rank statistics help show the usefulness of ranks. For example, ranks for relatively rare diseases or less populated areas may be essentially meaningless because of their large variability, but ranks for more common diseases in densely populated regions can be very useful. More information about methodology can be found on the CI*Rank website.

When displaying county information, the CI*Rank for the state is not shown because it's not comparable. To see the state CI*Rank please view the statistics at the US By State level.

Healthy People 2030 Objectives provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Φ Rural–urban county classifications are based on the 2023 USDA Rural–Urban Continuum Codes (except for Connecticut Counties which use 2013 codes). State-level cancer rates for rural areas are calculated using cancer cases registered exclusively in rural counties, while state-level cancer rates for urban areas are calculated using cases registered exclusively in urban counties.

Data for United States does not include Puerto Rico.

Return to Top