Death Rates Table
County
|
2023 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes Φ
|
Met Healthy People Objective of 122.7? |
Age-Adjusted Death Rate † deaths per 100,000 (95% Confidence Interval)
|
CI*Rank ⋔ (95% Confidence Interval)
|
Average Annual Count
|
Recent Trend |
Recent 5-Year Trend ‡ in Death Rates (95% Confidence Interval) 
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | N/A | No | 132.7 (132.2, 133.2) | N/A | 59,840 |
falling 
|
-1.5 (-1.6, -1.5) |
| United States | N/A | No | 146.0 (145.8, 146.2) | N/A | 602,955 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-1.6, -1.4) |
| Mono County | Rural | Yes | 48.9 (35.3, 66.6) | 58 (58, 58) | 9 |
falling
|
-15.2 (-44.7, -4.1) |
| Trinity County | Rural | Yes | 92.4 (77.1, 110.7) | 57 (49, 57) | 30 |
falling
|
-7.2 (-21.9, -3.7) |
| San Francisco County | Urban | Yes | 116.3 (113.4, 119.2) | 51 (46, 54) | 1,290 |
falling
|
-3.2 (-5.5, -2.1) |
| Plumas County | Rural | No | 130.3 (113.7, 149.4) | 37 (10, 56) | 51 |
falling
|
-2.7 (-6.7, -2.0) |
| San Mateo County | Urban | Yes | 111.4 (108.4, 114.4) | 54 (50, 56) | 1,101 |
falling
|
-2.5 (-2.8, -2.3) |
| San Joaquin County | Urban | No | 146.1 (142.3, 150.0) | 17 (12, 27) | 1,155 |
falling
|
-2.3 (-4.4, -1.4) |
| Santa Clara County | Urban | Yes | 109.9 (107.9, 112.0) | 56 (51, 57) | 2,372 |
falling
|
-2.3 (-2.9, -1.2) |
| Alameda County | Urban | Yes | 119.7 (117.5, 121.9) | 49 (44, 52) | 2,259 |
falling
|
-2.2 (-2.7, -2.1) |
| Marin County | Urban | Yes | 111.1 (106.6, 115.7) | 55 (49, 57) | 492 |
falling
|
-2.2 (-2.4, -1.9) |
| Contra Costa County | Urban | No | 126.4 (123.7, 129.0) | 45 (35, 49) | 1,823 |
falling
|
-2.1 (-2.8, -1.8) |
| Imperial County | Urban | Yes | 114.3 (107.4, 121.5) | 53 (44, 57) | 210 |
falling
|
-2.0 (-2.4, -1.7) |
| Napa County | Urban | No | 132.2 (125.1, 139.7) | 34 (21, 48) | 271 |
falling
|
-2.0 (-2.4, -1.7) |
| Sierra County | Rural | Yes | 114.9 (81.2, 165.1) | 52 (3, 57) | 8 |
falling
|
-1.9 (-3.2, -0.5) |
| Colusa County | Rural | No | 126.1 (106.8, 147.9) | 46 (10, 57) | 31 |
falling
|
-1.8 (-2.6, -1.1) |
| El Dorado County | Urban | No | 124.4 (118.7, 130.5) | 48 (33, 52) | 373 |
falling
|
-1.8 (-2.0, -1.5) |
| Tuolumne County | Rural | No | 146.2 (135.3, 157.9) | 15 (8, 39) | 149 |
falling
|
-1.8 (-4.9, -1.3) |
| Mariposa County | Rural | No | 130.6 (112.4, 151.6) | 35 (9, 56) | 44 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.4, -0.9) |
| Monterey County | Urban | Yes | 119.2 (114.8, 123.7) | 50 (42, 54) | 566 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-1.9, -1.5) |
| Nevada County | Rural | No | 126.6 (119.0, 134.6) | 43 (27, 52) | 243 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.1, -1.4) |
| Placer County | Urban | No | 129.5 (125.4, 133.7) | 39 (31, 48) | 777 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-1.9, -1.4) |
| San Benito County | Urban | No | 130.1 (117.8, 143.4) | 38 (14, 55) | 85 |
falling
|
-1.7 (-2.3, -1.0) |
| Inyo County | Rural | No | 128.8 (110.8, 149.4) | 41 (10, 57) | 41 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-2.1, -1.1) |
| Mendocino County | Rural | No | 144.5 (135.4, 154.1) | 20 (9, 38) | 207 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-1.8, -1.3) |
| San Diego County | Urban | No | 136.5 (134.8, 138.2) | 31 (25, 37) | 5,064 |
falling
|
-1.6 (-2.6, -1.4) |
| Lassen County | Rural | No | 143.4 (126.1, 162.4) | 24 (5, 51) | 52 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-2.0, -0.9) |
| Los Angeles County | Urban | No | 130.3 (129.4, 131.3) | 36 (32, 43) | 14,510 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-1.6, -1.5) |
| Orange County | Urban | No | 125.0 (123.4, 126.6) | 47 (38, 49) | 4,741 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-1.6, -1.5) |
| Santa Cruz County | Urban | No | 126.9 (121.4, 132.5) | 42 (31, 51) | 427 |
falling
|
-1.5 (-1.8, -1.2) |
| Amador County | Rural | No | 138.7 (126.9, 151.6) | 29 (10, 49) | 108 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.9, -0.9) |
| Riverside County | Urban | No | 140.6 (138.6, 142.6) | 26 (20, 32) | 3,870 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.5, -1.3) |
| Sacramento County | Urban | No | 146.2 (143.6, 148.8) | 16 (12, 26) | 2,583 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-2.3, -1.3) |
| San Bernardino County | Urban | No | 149.3 (146.9, 151.7) | 14 (11, 22) | 3,056 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.9, -1.3) |
| San Luis Obispo County | Urban | No | 133.1 (127.9, 138.3) | 33 (24, 45) | 551 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.6, -1.2) |
| Sonoma County | Urban | No | 139.6 (135.7, 143.7) | 28 (18, 35) | 995 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.6, -1.2) |
| Sutter County | Urban | No | 143.8 (134.3, 153.9) | 22 (9, 39) | 173 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.7, -1.0) |
| Ventura County | Urban | No | 128.9 (125.8, 132.0) | 40 (32, 47) | 1,347 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.6, -1.2) |
| Yolo County | Urban | No | 142.4 (135.2, 149.8) | 25 (11, 36) | 304 |
falling
|
-1.4 (-1.7, -1.1) |
| Calaveras County | Rural | No | 143.5 (131.6, 156.4) | 23 (8, 45) | 125 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-1.7, -0.9) |
| Kern County | Urban | No | 145.5 (141.7, 149.4) | 18 (12, 29) | 1,176 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-1.5, -1.2) |
| Lake County | Rural | No | 169.7 (158.5, 181.6) | 6 (1, 13) | 187 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-1.6, -0.9) |
| Modoc County | Rural | No | 134.2 (109.1, 164.9) | 32 (2, 57) | 23 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-2.2, -0.4) |
| Santa Barbara County | Urban | No | 126.5 (122.2, 130.9) | 44 (33, 50) | 683 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-1.5, -1.1) |
| Solano County | Urban | No | 150.8 (146.2, 155.6) | 12 (9, 23) | 829 |
falling
|
-1.3 (-1.5, -1.2) |
| Del Norte County | Rural | No | 177.2 (158.3, 198.0) | 2 (1, 16) | 68 |
falling
|
-1.2 (-1.8, -0.6) |
| Fresno County | Urban | No | 138.2 (134.9, 141.6) | 30 (21, 36) | 1,353 |
falling
|
-1.2 (-1.3, -1.1) |
| Glenn County | Rural | No | 168.5 (149.6, 189.3) | 7 (1, 28) | 59 |
falling
|
-1.2 (-1.9, -0.6) |
| Humboldt County | Rural | No | 171.8 (163.0, 180.9) | 4 (1, 10) | 311 |
falling
|
-1.2 (-1.5, -0.9) |
| Merced County | Urban | No | 145.3 (138.6, 152.2) | 19 (10, 33) | 367 |
falling
|
-1.2 (-1.5, -1.0) |
| Yuba County | Urban | No | 165.5 (152.8, 178.9) | 9 (1, 18) | 134 |
falling
|
-1.2 (-1.6, -0.7) |
| Shasta County | Urban | No | 162.4 (155.5, 169.6) | 10 (3, 13) | 443 |
falling
|
-1.1 (-1.3, -0.8) |
| Butte County | Urban | No | 171.1 (164.1, 178.3) | 5 (1, 10) | 478 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.3, -0.7) |
| Madera County | Urban | No | 140.1 (132.0, 148.6) | 27 (12, 42) | 229 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.4, -0.7) |
| Siskiyou County | Rural | No | 165.5 (151.9, 180.2) | 8 (1, 22) | 126 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-1.3, -0.6) |
| Stanislaus County | Urban | No | 156.9 (152.3, 161.6) | 11 (7, 15) | 891 |
falling
|
-1.0 (-3.1, -0.5) |
| Kings County | Urban | No | 144.1 (134.9, 153.8) | 21 (9, 38) | 187 |
falling
|
-0.9 (-1.3, -0.5) |
| Tulare County | Urban | No | 150.2 (144.9, 155.5) | 13 (9, 26) | 639 |
stable 
|
1.3 (-1.0, 3.7) |
| Tehama County | Rural | No | 173.3 (161.2, 186.1) | 3 (1, 12) | 162 |
stable
|
2.3 (-1.5, 8.3) |
| Alpine County | Rural | No | 187.9 (108.9, 316.4) | 1 (1, 57) | 4 |
|
|
Notes:
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/08/2024 6:08 pm.
State Cancer Registries may provide more current or more local data.
† 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 (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85+). 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.
Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.
* Data has been suppressed to ensure confidentiality and stability of rate estimates. Counts are suppressed if fewer than 16 records were reported in a specific area-sex-race category. If an average count of 3 is shown, the total number of cases for the time period is 16 or more which exceeds suppression threshold (but is rounded to 3).
Please note that the data comes from different sources. Due to different years of data availability, most of the trends are AAPCs based on APCs but some are APCs calculated in SEER*Stat. Please refer to the source for each graph for additional information.
Data for United States does not include Puerto Rico.
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.
Created by statecancerprofiles.cancer.gov on 10/08/2024 6:08 pm.
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.
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 (19 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, ... , 80-84, 85+). 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.
Φ Rural-Urban Continuum Codes provided by the USDA.
* Data has been suppressed to ensure confidentiality and stability of rate estimates. Counts are suppressed if fewer than 16 records were reported in a specific area-sex-race category. If an average count of 3 is shown, the total number of cases for the time period is 16 or more which exceeds suppression threshold (but is rounded to 3).
Please note that the data comes from different sources. Due to different years of data availability, most of the trends are AAPCs based on APCs but some are APCs calculated in SEER*Stat. Please refer to the source for each graph for additional information.
Data for United States does not include Puerto Rico.
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.