The age-qualified population for assisted living, memory care and independent living, ranked across all 50 states and the District of Columbia — size, four-year growth and concentration — straight from Census Bureau Vintage 2024 estimates, with the trade-area arithmetic a lender actually underwrites.
Send the project type, the target market and the approximate total project cost. You get back a written scope, a delivery date and a fixed fee — by email, normally within one business day. Trade-area demand, penetration and absorption are built from primary data, not national averages.
Senior housing demand starts with one number: how many people aged 75 and older live within reach of the site. Nationally that population reached 25,734,956 in 2024, up 17.6% since 2020 — an increase of 3,845,913 people in four years. But the national figure is close to useless for underwriting, because the growth is distributed very unevenly. Alaska added 75-and-over residents 2.5 times faster than the slowest-growing state over the same period.
This page ranks all 50 states and the District of Columbia three ways — by the size of the 75+ population, by how fast it is growing, and by how concentrated it is as a share of total population. Every figure is the Census Bureau's, not ours, and the method is stated below so you can reproduce it.
Absolute population size determines how many units a market can absorb before penetration assumptions strain credibility. These ten states hold 54% of the national 75-and-over population:
| # | State | Age 75+ (2024) | Growth 2020–24 | Added since 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | California | 2,776,397 | +17.0% | 403,587 |
| 2 | Florida | 2,347,707 | +18.6% | 367,622 |
| 3 | Texas | 1,746,936 | +20.4% | 295,548 |
| 4 | New York | 1,629,965 | +16.3% | 228,509 |
| 5 | Pennsylvania | 1,129,837 | +13.1% | 130,667 |
| 6 | Illinois | 953,263 | +14.4% | 120,186 |
| 7 | Ohio | 934,474 | +14.1% | 115,142 |
| 8 | North Carolina | 814,586 | +20.9% | 140,691 |
| 9 | Michigan | 807,211 | +15.7% | 109,389 |
| 10 | New Jersey | 729,399 | +16.2% | 101,690 |
Growth rate is the better signal for development, because it indicates a cohort arriving faster than the existing inventory was built to serve. Small bases inflate percentages, so the added-residents column is shown alongside:
| # | State | Growth 2020–24 | Added since 2020 | Age 75+ (2024) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alaska | +28.7% | 8,618 | 38,628 |
| 2 | South Carolina | +24.6% | 87,256 | 441,869 |
| 3 | Delaware | +24.4% | 18,156 | 92,516 |
| 4 | Colorado | +24.3% | 76,192 | 390,223 |
| 5 | Idaho | +24.1% | 27,930 | 143,914 |
| 6 | Nevada | +24.0% | 46,002 | 237,978 |
| 7 | New Hampshire | +23.4% | 23,297 | 122,702 |
| 8 | Georgia | +22.9% | 133,111 | 713,668 |
| 9 | Vermont | +22.4% | 11,159 | 60,943 |
| 10 | Arizona | +22.1% | 120,437 | 665,700 |
Share of total population tells you how much of a state's economy, labour force and housing stock is already organised around older residents. High-share states tend to have deeper existing inventory and more established referral networks; low-share, fast-growth states are where new inventory most often finds an underserved cohort — and where staffing is hardest to recruit.
| # | State | 75+ share of population | Age 75+ (2024) | Growth 2020–24 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hawaii | 10.23% | 143,843 | +21.3% |
| 2 | Florida | 10.07% | 2,347,707 | +18.6% |
| 3 | Maine | 9.76% | 137,036 | +20.1% |
| 4 | Vermont | 9.40% | 60,943 | +22.4% |
| 5 | West Virginia | 9.24% | 163,499 | +14.2% |
| 6 | Delaware | 8.82% | 92,516 | +24.4% |
| 7 | Arizona | 8.80% | 665,700 | +22.1% |
| 8 | New Hampshire | 8.71% | 122,702 | +23.4% |
| 9 | Pennsylvania | 8.64% | 1,129,837 | +13.1% |
| 10 | New Mexico | 8.60% | 182,144 | +19.7% |
| # | State | Age 75+ (2024) | Age 85+ (2024) | Growth 2020–24 | Added since 2020 | Share of population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | California | 2,776,397 | 728,742 | +17.0% | 403,587 | 7.07% |
| 2 | Florida | 2,347,707 | 612,067 | +18.6% | 367,622 | 10.07% |
| 3 | Texas | 1,746,936 | 411,277 | +20.4% | 295,548 | 5.60% |
| 4 | New York | 1,629,965 | 450,648 | +16.3% | 228,509 | 8.21% |
| 5 | Pennsylvania | 1,129,837 | 298,587 | +13.1% | 130,667 | 8.64% |
| 6 | Illinois | 953,263 | 251,937 | +14.4% | 120,186 | 7.51% |
| 7 | Ohio | 934,474 | 232,985 | +14.1% | 115,142 | 7.87% |
| 8 | North Carolina | 814,586 | 185,152 | +20.9% | 140,691 | 7.44% |
| 9 | Michigan | 807,211 | 193,220 | +15.7% | 109,389 | 7.96% |
| 10 | New Jersey | 729,399 | 193,246 | +16.2% | 101,690 | 7.68% |
| 11 | Georgia | 713,668 | 159,859 | +22.9% | 133,111 | 6.41% |
| 12 | Arizona | 665,700 | 158,340 | +22.1% | 120,437 | 8.80% |
| 13 | Virginia | 652,952 | 156,638 | +20.0% | 108,816 | 7.50% |
| 14 | Massachusetts | 566,988 | 145,816 | +17.8% | 85,748 | 7.95% |
| 15 | Washington | 566,530 | 132,442 | +22.1% | 102,513 | 7.16% |
| 16 | Tennessee | 521,772 | 117,503 | +17.1% | 76,232 | 7.24% |
| 17 | Indiana | 497,147 | 125,273 | +15.0% | 64,721 | 7.18% |
| 18 | Missouri | 487,631 | 124,625 | +13.5% | 57,919 | 7.83% |
| 19 | Wisconsin | 472,100 | 117,937 | +15.4% | 62,867 | 7.92% |
| 20 | Maryland | 464,895 | 117,879 | +19.6% | 76,251 | 7.46% |
| 21 | South Carolina | 441,869 | 93,805 | +24.6% | 87,256 | 8.12% |
| 22 | Minnesota | 439,048 | 119,959 | +16.2% | 61,305 | 7.58% |
| 23 | Alabama | 395,768 | 92,714 | +15.4% | 52,878 | 7.69% |
| 24 | Colorado | 390,223 | 90,022 | +24.3% | 76,192 | 6.59% |
| 25 | Oregon | 358,175 | 81,027 | +21.5% | 63,461 | 8.39% |
| 26 | Kentucky | 335,429 | 78,591 | +15.1% | 44,082 | 7.34% |
| 27 | Louisiana | 328,225 | 77,944 | +15.5% | 43,951 | 7.16% |
| 28 | Connecticut | 308,292 | 82,125 | +16.8% | 44,422 | 8.40% |
| 29 | Oklahoma | 286,681 | 70,109 | +12.7% | 32,287 | 7.03% |
| 30 | Iowa | 259,500 | 73,531 | +11.6% | 26,930 | 8.01% |
| 31 | Arkansas | 238,363 | 57,997 | +12.9% | 27,232 | 7.73% |
| 32 | Nevada | 237,978 | 49,927 | +24.0% | 46,002 | 7.31% |
| 33 | Kansas | 219,475 | 59,082 | +13.2% | 25,615 | 7.44% |
| 34 | Mississippi | 215,508 | 51,378 | +13.0% | 24,760 | 7.35% |
| 35 | New Mexico | 182,144 | 42,106 | +19.7% | 29,926 | 8.60% |
| 36 | Utah | 171,523 | 37,823 | +20.0% | 28,567 | 4.90% |
| 37 | West Virginia | 163,499 | 38,620 | +14.2% | 20,321 | 9.24% |
| 38 | Nebraska | 144,732 | 38,155 | +13.0% | 16,601 | 7.24% |
| 39 | Idaho | 143,914 | 31,927 | +24.1% | 27,930 | 7.20% |
| 40 | Hawaii | 143,843 | 42,670 | +21.3% | 25,216 | 10.23% |
| 41 | Maine | 137,036 | 32,607 | +20.1% | 22,957 | 9.76% |
| 42 | New Hampshire | 122,702 | 29,938 | +23.4% | 23,297 | 8.71% |
| 43 | Montana | 96,573 | 22,807 | +20.5% | 16,435 | 8.52% |
| 44 | Delaware | 92,516 | 20,702 | +24.4% | 18,156 | 8.82% |
| 45 | Rhode Island | 92,038 | 24,832 | +14.8% | 11,840 | 8.30% |
| 46 | South Dakota | 68,060 | 19,077 | +13.1% | 7,896 | 7.39% |
| 47 | Vermont | 60,943 | 14,152 | +22.4% | 11,159 | 9.40% |
| 48 | North Dakota | 58,258 | 17,911 | +11.7% | 6,079 | 7.38% |
| 49 | Wyoming | 45,111 | 10,784 | +20.1% | 7,538 | 7.71% |
| 50 | District of Columbia | 39,744 | 11,103 | +15.6% | 5,358 | 5.68% |
| 51 | Alaska | 38,628 | 7,545 | +28.7% | 8,618 | 5.38% |
State-level population is a screening tool. It tells you which states deserve a site search and which do not. It does not underwrite a building, and a lender will not accept it as demand evidence. The reason is arithmetic: senior housing trade areas are typically five to ten miles in urban markets and fifteen to thirty in rural ones, and the age-qualified population inside that ring can differ from the state average by a factor of three.
Two mistakes recur in senior housing files we are asked to review. The first is applying a national penetration rate to a local market — penetration varies with income distribution, adult-child proximity and existing inventory, none of which are national constants. The second is counting the 75+ population without adjusting for income qualification: independent living, assisted living and memory care serve different affordability bands, and the addressable population for a given rent point is always a fraction of the age-qualified count.
Our assisted living development guide works through demand, cost, rent-up and EBITDA for a single project, and the senior care feasibility study service page sets out what a lender-ready study contains.
Figures are the U.S. Census Bureau's Vintage 2024 state characteristics estimates of the resident civilian population by single year of age and sex (file sc-est2024-agesex-civ, released 2025). We summed both sexes across ages 75 through the top-coded 85-and-over bucket for each state, for the July 1, 2020 and July 1, 2024 estimate vintages, and computed growth between them. Share of population uses each state's total resident civilian population for 2024 from the same file. No adjustment, projection or interpolation has been applied, and no figure on this page is a Wert-Berater estimate.
Population is one input to a feasibility study, not a substitute for one. Nothing here is an opinion on any specific site, and no part of this page should be relied on as a demand conclusion for a project.
Independent feasibility studies since 1998 — 4,000+ engagements, $40.2 billion in evaluated project value. Standard delivery 10–15 business days; RUSH delivery available at additional cost. Fixed fee, quoted before any work begins, never contingent on the finding.