2016-2020 N.C. RESIDENT LIVE BIRTHS WITH AGE OF MOTHER UNDER 30
BY COUNTY OF RESIDENCE: NUMBER AT RISK DUE TO HIGH PARITY
AND PERCENT OF ALL BIRTHS WITH AGE OF MOTHER LESS THAN 30
**INDICATOR OF NEED FOR FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES**

RESIDENCE NUMBER
HIGH
PARITY
BIRTHS
PERCENT
HIGH
PARITY
NORTH CAROLINA 43,052 12.8
ALAMANCE 766 13.6
ALEXANDER 147 12.4
ALLEGHANY 46 14.2
ANSON 170 18.1
ASHE 109 15.7
AVERY 38 9.3
BEAUFORT 240 16.8
BERTIE 72 11.9
BLADEN 155 13.0
BRUNSWICK 325 11.1
BUNCOMBE 532 9.0
BURKE 393 13.2
CABARRUS 786 12.0
CALDWELL 380 13.5
CAMDEN 18 6.7
CARTERET 136 9.9
CASWELL 87 13.7
CATAWBA 809 15.3
CHATHAM 155 10.9
CHEROKEE 132 15.9
CHOWAN 61 13.9
CLAY 39 12.7
CLEVELAND 616 15.6
COLUMBUS 270 12.9
CRAVEN 510 11.2
CUMBERLAND 2,340 12.8
CURRITUCK 55 7.4
DARE 62 8.1
DAVIDSON 820 14.1
DAVIE 120 10.3
DUPLIN 395 17.0
DURHAM 1,307 14.0
EDGECOMBE 369 17.2
FORSYTH 1,803 14.9
FRANKLIN 278 13.0
GASTON 1,102 13.8
GATES 33 10.3
GRAHAM 40 13.2
GRANVILLE 186 11.0
GREENE 119 16.9
GUILFORD 2,235 13.3
HALIFAX 343 17.4
HARNETT 710 12.6
HAYWOOD 182 10.2
HENDERSON 282 9.5
HERTFORD 114 16.1
HOKE 347 12.5
HYDE 16 14.8
IREDELL 616 11.7
JACKSON 171 14.4
JOHNSTON 619 9.2
JONES 46 14.3
LEE 336 13.5
LENOIR 429 19.5
LINCOLN 299 11.9
MCDOWELL 156 10.3
MACON 118 11.4
MADISON 63 10.5
MARTIN 132 16.6
MECKLENBURG 4,236 12.5
MITCHELL 52 10.6
MONTGOMERY 148 15.7
MOORE 304 10.7
NASH 516 14.9
NEW HANOVER 662 12.9
NORTHAMPTON 120 18.0
ONSLOW 1,095 7.6
ORANGE 217 10.4
PAMLICO 35 13.6
PASQUOTANK 186 12.4
PENDER 206 12.1
PERQUIMANS 42 11.1
PERSON 196 14.6
PITT 862 14.3
POLK 40 8.9
RANDOLPH 621 12.4
RICHMOND 347 16.8
ROBESON 952 15.0
ROCKINGHAM 406 13.4
ROWAN 748 14.4
RUTHERFORD 378 15.7
SAMPSON 417 15.6
SCOTLAND 299 18.1
STANLY 262 11.7
STOKES 144 11.1
SURRY 321 12.8
SWAIN 107 18.5
TRANSYLVANIA 70 9.3
TYRRELL 14 11.6
UNION 660 11.3
VANCE 356 18.4
WAKE 2,656 10.5
WARREN 91 15.9
WASHINGTON 88 18.6
WATAUGA 71 8.5
WAYNE 778 14.7
WILKES 368 15.4
WILSON 509 16.7
YADKIN 179 14.4
YANCEY 58 9.7

PREPARED BY NC-DHHS STATE CENTER FOR HEALTH STATISTICS
NOTE: RATES BASED ON SMALL NUMBERS (FEWER THAN 20 CASES)
ARE UNSTABLE AND SHOULD BE INTERPRETED WITH CAUTION