Civic Desert Index
CIRCLE's 2017 study coined the term "civic desert" — places without youth programming, arts orgs, or active religious congregations — and found 60% of rural millennials live in one. We translated that framing into a county-level score: youth-relevant 501(c) entities per under-25 resident. Click any county for its full nonprofit list and demographic profile.
U.S. under-25s in Civic Desert counties
21.6%
Youth in counties scoring in the bottom quintile by youth-relevant orgs per under-25 resident.
U.S. under-25s in Double-Desert counties
2.7%
246 counties bottom-quintile on both count and capacity (revenue per youth). The actually-actionable list.
Rural youth in Civic Deserts
21.4%
CIRCLE's 2017 survey put this at 60% based on self-reported access. Registry-based density is lower — see methodology.
Urban youth in Civic Deserts
21.6%
Within ~1pp of the rural rate. Rurality alone doesn't predict desert status — composition does.
Geographic distribution
Legend
Civic Desert tier (count-based score quintile)
Counties bottom-quintile on both count and capacity ("Double-Desert") get a heavier outline. Hover for score and tier; click any county to open its spotlight. On a phone, tap once for the numbers and again to open it.
Tier mix by USDA Rural-Urban Continuum Code
Each bar is the share of under-25 residents in that RUCC class living in counties of each tier. Mid-metros (RUCC 2) and standalone nonmetro counties without metro adjacency (RUCC 5) show the highest concentration of youth in Civic Desert counties — not the most rural areas. Deep rural counties (RUCC 8–9) score better than the largest metros (RUCC 1).
Showing 3,113 of 3,113 counties.
| # | Tier | RUCC | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Peñuelas Municipio, PR | 0.00 | — | 0 | 5,818 | 20,399 | 2 | |
| 2 | Guayama Municipio, PR | 0.20 | — | 2 2 zombies cut | 9,857 | 36,614 | 3 | |
| 3 | Yabucoa Municipio, PR | 0.27 | $2k | 2 2 filing 990 | 7,434 | 30,426 | 1 | |
| 4 | Villalba Municipio, PR | 0.32 | $75 | 2 2 filing 990 | 6,196 | 22,093 | 2 | |
| 5 | Juncos Municipio, PR | 0.39 | $202 | 4 2 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 10,350 | 37,012 | 1 | |
| 6 | Comerío Municipio, PR | 0.40 | — | 2 | 4,953 | 18,883 | 1 | |
| 7 | Guayanilla Municipio, PR | 0.43 | $21 | 2 2 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 4,677 | 17,784 | 2 | |
| 8 | Morovis Municipio, PR | 0.51 | $2k | 4 2 filing 990 | 7,787 | 28,727 | 1 | |
| 9 | Vega Baja Municipio, PR | 0.58 | $926 | 8 4 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 13,875 | 54,414 | 1 | |
| 10 | Juana Díaz Municipio, PR | 0.62 | — | 8 2 zombies cut | 12,868 | 46,538 | 2 | |
| 11 | San Lorenzo Municipio, PR | 0.64 | $149 | 6 4 filing 990 | 9,412 | 37,693 | 1 | |
| 12 | Las Piedras Municipio, PR | 0.66 | — | 6 | 9,139 | 35,180 | 1 | |
| 13 | Toa Alta Municipio, PR | 0.67 | $7 | 12 2 filing 990 · 4 zombies cut | 18,028 | 66,852 | 1 | |
| 14 | Santa Isabel Municipio, PR | 0.70 | — | 4 | 5,694 | 20,281 | 6 | |
| 15 | Coamo Municipio, PR | 0.72 | $172 | 6 4 filing 990 | 8,387 | 34,668 | 4 | |
| 16 | Cayey Municipio, PR | 0.78 | $51 | 8 4 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 10,321 | 41,652 | 1 | |
| 17 | Maunabo Municipio, PR | 0.80 | $12k | 2 2 filing 990 | 2,495 | 10,589 | 1 | |
| 18 | Corozal Municipio, PR | 0.85 | $5k | 8 2 filing 990 | 9,443 | 34,571 | 1 | |
| 19 | Salinas Municipio, PR | 0.86 | $3k | 6 4 filing 990 | 6,984 | 25,789 | 4 | |
| 20 | Toa Baja Municipio, PR | 0.93 | $61 | 18 4 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 19,309 | 75,293 | 1 | |
| 21 | Arecibo Municipio, PR | 0.99 | $2k | 22 12 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 22,142 | 87,754 | 3 | |
| 22 | Naranjito Municipio, PR | 1.04 | $33k | 8 6 filing 990 | 7,701 | 29,241 | 1 | |
| 23 | Lajas Municipio, PR | 1.08 | — | 6 | 5,547 | 23,334 | 3 | |
| 24 | Carolina Municipio, PR | 1.09 | $751 | 42 10 filing 990 · 12 zombies cut | 38,454 | 154,815 | 1 | |
| 25 | Guánica Municipio, PR | 1.10 | $441 | 4 2 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 3,639 | 13,787 | 6 | |
| 26 | Starr County, TX | 1.13 | $170 | 33 10 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 29,094 | 65,920 | 4 | |
| 27 | Utuado Municipio, PR | 1.14 | $114 | 8 4 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 7,024 | 28,287 | 6 | |
| 28 | Trujillo Alto Municipio, PR | 1.16 | $87 | 20 2 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 17,297 | 67,740 | 1 | |
| 29 | Camuy Municipio, PR | 1.22 | $16k | 10 6 filing 990 | 8,185 | 32,827 | 3 | |
| 30 | San Sebastián Municipio, PR | 1.23 | $1k | 12 2 filing 990 | 9,788 | 39,345 | 2 | |
| 31 | Vega Alta Municipio, PR | 1.23 | $2k | 12 10 filing 990 · 4 zombies cut | 9,734 | 35,395 | 1 | |
| 32 | Aguas Buenas Municipio, PR | 1.30 | $257 | 8 2 filing 990 | 6,175 | 24,223 | 1 | |
| 33 | Aibonito Municipio, PR | 1.33 | $347 | 8 4 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 6,013 | 24,637 | 1 | |
| 34 | Cataño Municipio, PR | 1.33 | $41 | 8 2 filing 990 | 5,997 | 23,155 | 1 | |
| 35 | Mayagüez Municipio, PR | 1.33 | $4k | 30 16 filing 990 · 8 zombies cut | 22,522 | 73,077 | 3 | |
| 36 | Barceloneta Municipio, PR | 1.34 | $12k | 8 4 filing 990 | 5,973 | 22,657 | 1 | |
| 37 | Río Grande Municipio, PR | 1.36 | $134 | 16 4 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 11,783 | 47,060 | 1 | |
| 38 | Arroyo Municipio, PR | 1.40 | $16k | 6 2 filing 990 | 4,277 | 15,843 | 3 | |
| 39 | Ciales Municipio, PR | 1.40 | $16k | 6 4 filing 990 | 4,272 | 16,984 | 1 | |
| 40 | Barranquitas Municipio, PR | 1.41 | $7k | 12 4 filing 990 | 8,497 | 28,983 | 1 | |
| 41 | Jayuya Municipio, PR | 1.44 | — | 6 | 4,162 | 14,779 | 6 | |
| 42 | Ceiba Municipio, PR | 1.47 | $351 | 4 2 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 2,717 | 11,307 | 1 | |
| 43 | Maverick County, TX | 1.51 | $2k | 37 10 filing 990 · 7 zombies cut | 24,424 | 57,887 | 3 | |
| 44 | Zapata County, TX | 1.52 | $175 | 9 2 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 5,911 | 13,889 | 6 | |
| 45 | Aguadilla Municipio, PR | 1.55 | $249 | 22 4 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 14,221 | 55,101 | 2 | |
| 46 | Moca Municipio, PR | 1.58 | $8k | 16 12 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 10,138 | 37,460 | 2 | |
| 47 | Canóvanas Municipio, PR | 1.60 | $210 | 18 6 filing 990 · 2 zombies cut | 11,280 | 42,337 | 1 | |
| 48 | Maricao Municipio, PR | 1.61 | — | 2 | 1,240 | 4,755 | 8 | |
| 49 | Patillas Municipio, PR | 1.61 | $20k | 6 4 filing 990 | 3,726 | 15,985 | 3 | |
| 50 | Webster County, GA | 1.62 | $181 | 1 1 filing 990 | 619 | 2,348 | 8 |
Page 1 of 63 — showing 1–50 of 3,113
Methodology. The Civic Desert count score = (count of youth-relevant 501(c) entities) ÷ (under-25 population) × 1,000. The Civic Desert capacity score = (sum of those orgs' reported revenue) ÷ (under-25 population), reported in dollars per youth. "Youth-relevant" counts orgs in NTEE major categories O (Youth Development), A (Arts/Culture/Humanities), B (Education), and N (Recreation/Sports), plus any org with IRS classification code beginning "1000" (church / religious congregation). Two exclusions apply throughout: (1) registered-agent address clusters (≥25 orgs at one address — e.g. Foundation Source in Wilmington DE) are stripped; (2) zombie organizations are stripped — defined as orgs with no Form 990 filing since Jan 2021 AND no reported revenue or assets, where the org isn't a church or religious-exempt non-filer. About 18.6% of all BMF orgs are zombies; only 2–4% of youth-relevant orgs are (because most youth-relevant orgs are churches, which structurally never zombie out under this rule). Source: IRS Exempt Organizations BMF + ACS 5-year (2023) Subject Table S0101 + USDA RUCC 2023.
Why two scores. Count alone treats a $0 paper-filing 501(c) the same as a fully-staffed Boys & Girls Club. Capacity reweights to financial scale. But capacity has its own blind spot: churches are exempt from Form 990 filing entirely, so every classification=1000 entity reports $0 revenue regardless of actual budget — meaning rural counties whose civic stock is church-heavy will look low on capacity even when the churches are large and active. Similarly, 501(c)s with annual gross receipts under $50k file the 990-N postcard which doesn't report revenue. About 29% of all orgs and 34% of youth-relevant orgs report a non-zero revenue figure to the IRS. Double-Desert counties — bottom quintile on both scores — are the subset where neither blind spot saves them: few orgs, and the ones that exist are tiny.
Tiering. Counties are ranked by score and split into quintiles: bottom 20% = Civic Desert, next 20% = Civic Thin, middle = Mid, then Civic Solid and Civic Rich. Counties with under-25 pop < 500 are excluded as denominator-noise; Connecticut planning regions are excluded because the IRS join still uses the pre-2022 county FIPS.
Difference from CIRCLE. CIRCLE's 2017 survey of 1,000 millennials found 60% of rural youth in "civic deserts" based on self-reported access to civic resources. Our number — counties only, not individuals — sits much lower because IRS registration lists every active 501(c) regardless of operational vigor or distance to the youth who could actually use it. A registered VFW post 30 minutes from a 17-year-old without a car still counts here; in the CIRCLE framework, it doesn't. Use this index to find counties where civic stock is thin per youth, not as a measurement of lived civic experience.