Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What is the lgbt+ population percentage per state
Executive Summary
National estimates of adults who identify as LGBT/LGBTQ+ differ by source and methodology, but all analyses agree state-level shares vary widely and urban jurisdictions—especially the District of Columbia—rank at the top. The Williams Institute and recent compilations cite statewide shares in the mid-single digits for most states with pockets above 7–14% in places like Washington, D.C., Oregon, and Delaware, while older Gallup-based and couple-count measures produce lower or differently distributed figures; methodological differences—survey question wording, year, and whether measurement counts self-identified individuals or same‑sex households—drive much of the discrepancy [1] [2] [3].
1. How big is the countrywide LGBT sample fight?
Different headline national percentages reflect competing data frames rather than outright contradiction: the Williams Institute’s recent synthesis estimates roughly 5.5% of U.S. adults identify as LGBT in one dataset and cites concentrated higher shares in several states and D.C. [1] [2]. By contrast, other compilations referencing older Gallup series or 2015–2017 state estimates put nationwide shares nearer 4–4.5%, with Gallup’s state estimates showing some states under 3% and D.C. notably higher in earlier vintages as well [4] [5]. A 2025 Gallup poll referenced in one compilation reports a larger national share—9.3%—illustrating how sampling frames and question timing during rapidly changing self‑identification trends produce divergent national totals [6]. These numeric spreads highlight survey timing and question wording as principal drivers of differences.
2. Where are the highest concentrations—and why it matters locally
All analyses consistently flag Washington, D.C. as the highest-share jurisdiction, with reported figures ranging from about 8.6% to as high as 14.3% depending on the dataset used [1] [6] [3]. Several states on the coasts—Oregon, Delaware, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts—appear repeatedly among higher-share states in the Williams Institute and UCLA-derived summaries [2] [3]. The Scene differs when looking at counts versus rates: the South contains the largest absolute number of LGBT adults because of population size, while D.C. and some small states show higher rates. This distinction matters for policy and resource allocation—high absolute populations drive service needs; high rates indicate local visibility and cultural concentration [1] [7].
3. Why state rankings move around: methods and margins of error
State estimates stem from diverse sources—Gallup state-level models, BRFSS and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System compilations used by UCLA/Williams, and same‑sex couple counts from household surveys. Each method carries limits: self-report surveys capture identity but are sensitive to question wording and social climate; household couple counts miss single and noncohabiting LGBT adults, biasing results downward in some places [4] [7] [3]. Several sources note confidence intervals and small sample sizes at the state level, which means apparent rank differences between neighboring states may be statistically indistinguishable. Analysts and policymakers should therefore treat single-year state ranks as provisional and use multi‑year pooled estimates for firmer conclusions [4] [5].
4. What the trend lines and age patterns reveal about future figures
Multiple analyses emphasize that younger adults report LGBT identities at much higher rates, with nearly one in six adults aged 18–24 identifying as LGBT in some datasets, which helps explain rising national estimates in later polls [1] [6]. This generational pattern implies state-level shares may grow over time, particularly in states with younger or more urbanizing populations. The implication for comparisons is that cross-sectional state snapshots from different years capture different demographic mixes, so rising national percentages across recent years reflect both cohort replacement and increased willingness to self-identify in surveys [1] [6].
5. How to interpret competing claims and what’s missing from the record
When sources disagree, the divergence usually indicates different measurement goals or constraints, not fraud: household couple counts, Gallup’s single‑question national polls, and Williams Institute/UCLA BRFSS syntheses answer related but different questions about prevalence and distribution [7] [4] [3]. What’s often missing in public summaries is clear reporting of margins of error, exact question wording, and the year[8] pooled, which are essential to evaluate differences. Users seeking the most defensible state-by-state picture should rely on recent multi-year pooled BRFSS/Williams or similarly transparent state‑level estimates and treat single-year state ranks with caution [2] [4].