CEDSSummary Background People & Communities
Housing
Understand the households, homes, occupancy patterns, and moves that shape community stability and growth.
Understanding Who We Are Housing
What This Chapter Tells Us
Housing is where population and economic opportunity meet. An employer can recruit, a student can train, and a family can remain in the region only when suitable homes and the services around them are available. The regional picture begins with the households that need housing, then turns to the stock of homes and patterns of residential movement.
These measures have different denominators. Household composition describes households; occupancy uses all housing units; tenure uses occupied units; home values describe owner-occupied units; mobility asks current residents where they lived a year earlier. Read each chart on its own terms before connecting the patterns.
Explore the County Map
Switch measures and select a county to see where the numbers apply. The map shows county boundaries; its area does not represent the number of residents or homes.
County Data Explorer
The Regional Housing Picture
One Region
Choose a measure, then select a county on the map or in the comparison below.
Compare the Five Counties
Sources and Map Notes
County boundaries are from the U.S. Census Bureau, January 1, 2024. This is a county comparison, not a map of neighborhoods, parcels, tribal jurisdiction, or hazard zones. County totals include residents of the Mescalero Apache Tribe within those boundaries.
U.S. Census Bureau: About County Boundaries ↗Household Composition
Compare the mix of household types across counties. The proportions help frame questions about home size, caregiving, and services, but they cannot show what any particular household can afford or wants.
Household Mix Across Five Counties
This chart compares four reported household categories across Lea, Eddy, Otero, Chaves, and Lincoln counties. Select a category to see its percentage in every county; the bars share a zero-to-100-percent scale, and the exact value stays beside each bar. The categories describe a county's mix, so a 61% value for Lea's married-couple category means a reported share, not 61 households.
Start with the married-couple category: it ranges from 52% in Chaves to 61% in Lea. Then switch categories to see different county patterns. Chaves has the highest reported female-householder share at 22%, Eddy the highest male-householder share at 13%, and Lincoln the highest nonfamily share at 22%. These are differences between counties in one reported snapshot; they do not show that any category is rising or falling.
Compare the Evidence
Different Households, Different Service Needs
Choose a measure and comparison order to explore the values. Bars start at zero; values remain visible beside every bar.
Married Couples · A consistent zero-based scale makes the differences visible.
Reference year not specified. Reported percentages are historical context, not current estimates. Rounded categories may not total 100%. The source alternates between household and household-population terminology; use this as a composition comparison, not a count of households.
View All Values in a Table
| Area / Organization | Married Couples | Male Householder | Female Householder | Non-Family |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lea | 61% | 5% | 20% | 13% |
| Eddy | 60% | 13% | 14% | 14% |
| Lincoln | 58% | 7% | 13% | 22% |
| Otero | 56% | 7% | 20% | 18% |
| Chaves | 52% | 9% | 22% | 16% |
What Changes Across Counties
The most useful comparison is not a regional average. It is how the mix changes from county to county, because a housing or service response that fits one place may miss the needs of another. The examples below draw out four visible differences; none alone tells us why those households formed or what support residents use.
Lea
The highest reported share; Chaves is nine percentage points lower at 52%.
Chaves
The highest reported share; the figure does not identify income or children in these households.
Eddy
The highest reported share; the figure does not establish the reason for the difference.
Lincoln
The highest reported share, compared with 13% in Lea; household size is not shown.
Marital Status and Household Needs
This is a comparison of individual residents, grouped by county and reported sex, rather than a count of homes or couples. Use it to ask about support networks, not to infer need from marital status alone.
How to Read the Marital Status Chart
Choose Never Married, Divorced, Widowed, or Currently Married to compare all five counties. For every county, the chart shows two bars: one for the share of its reported male population in that status and one for the share of its reported female population. For example, Lea's 36% “Never Married” male value means 36% of the males represented in Lea's source population, not 36% of all Lea residents or households.
All bars start at zero and use the same 0–60% scale, so their lengths can be compared directly. The value beside each bar is the reported percentage. Highest First and Lowest First reorder counties by the male share of the selected status; the female values remain alongside for comparison. Open the exact-values table below the chart to see all four categories together.
Read Within Each Group
A male and female percentage use separate populations. They do not combine into a county total.
Compare One Status at a Time
The chart changes category when you use the selector; it does not show four stacked parts of a whole.
Do Not Infer a Trend
The reference year is unconfirmed, and separated residents are not displayed. The figures cannot show whether a status is becoming more common.
A useful first comparison is Never Married: Chaves reports 41% of males and 30% of females, while Lincoln reports 25% and 18%. Switch to Widowed and the pattern changes: Lincoln has the highest displayed shares, 6% of males and 13% of females. Those contrasts identify where local context deserves a closer look; they do not explain why residents have a particular status.
Compare the Evidence
Marital Status Across the Five Counties
Choose a marital-status category to compare male and female shares in each county. Bars start at zero; values remain visible beside every bar.
Never Married · A consistent zero-based scale makes the differences visible.
Reference year not specified. These reported shares are historical context, not current estimates. Each percentage is within the county’s reported male or female population. Separated residents are not displayed, so the four categories are not a complete partition; rounded values should not be added to estimate a total.
View All Values in a Table
| County | Status | Male | Female |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chaves | Never Married | 41% | 30% |
| Otero | Never Married | 40% | 29% |
| Lea | Never Married | 36% | 28% |
| Eddy | Never Married | 34% | 24% |
| Lincoln | Never Married | 25% | 18% |
| Chaves | Divorced | 13% | 17% |
| Otero | Divorced | 14% | 15% |
| Lea | Divorced | 8% | 16% |
| Eddy | Divorced | 11% | 14% |
| Lincoln | Divorced | 15% | 15% |
| Chaves | Widowed | 3% | 9% |
| Otero | Widowed | 2% | 10% |
| Lea | Widowed | 4% | 7% |
| Eddy | Widowed | 3% | 9% |
| Lincoln | Widowed | 6% | 13% |
| Chaves | Currently Married | 43% | 43% |
| Otero | Currently Married | 45% | 46% |
| Lea | Currently Married | 53% | 49% |
| Eddy | Currently Married | 52% | 54% |
| Lincoln | Currently Married | 54% | 54% |
Patterns in the Reported Snapshot
The four categories tell different parts of the story. These observations describe the values displayed in the chart; none establishes a cause or a change over time.
Higher Male Shares in Every County
Reported male shares range from 25% in Lincoln to 41% in Chaves. Reported female shares range from 18% to 30% in those same counties. The chart does not identify age or recent migration within either group.
The Difference Varies by County
Chaves reports 17% of females and 13% of males in this category; Lea reports 16% and 8%. Lincoln reports 15% for both. These percentages do not indicate whether residents have children or live alone.
Higher Female Shares Throughout
Female shares exceed male shares in all five counties. Lincoln has the highest displayed values for both groups: 13% of females and 6% of males. Age and living arrangements need separate evidence.
A 43–54% Reported Range
Lincoln reports 54% for both males and females; Chaves reports 43% for both. A married share is not a count of two-income households or a measure of economic security.
Housing Stock and Occupancy
Move from the number of housing units to occupancy, tenure, structure, and value. A vacant unit is not automatically available for year-round use, and assessed value is not a measure of affordability.
How Much Housing Exists?
The first chart counts all housing units in each county, whether a home is occupied or vacant. The five counties together have an estimated 132,622 units in the 2020–2024 American Community Survey (ACS). Each bar is a count, not a percentage; use Highest First or Lowest First to reorder the counties without changing their values.
Otero has the largest reported stock at 32,645 units, followed by Lea at 28,403. Lincoln has 17,871. A larger stock does not tell us how many units are available for a new resident, what they cost, or whether they are in usable condition. Those questions require the next comparisons and a current local inventory.
Compare the Evidence
The Scale of the Housing Stock
Choose a measure and comparison order to explore the values. Bars start at zero; values remain visible beside every bar.
Housing Units · A consistent zero-based scale makes the differences visible.
U.S. Census Bureau · 2020–2024 ACS 5-Year Estimates, table B25002. Counts include occupied and vacant housing units. Survey estimates have sampling uncertainty.
View All Values in a Table
| Area / Organization | Housing Units |
|---|---|
| Otero | 32,645 |
| Lea | 28,403 |
| Chaves | 26,864 |
| Eddy | 26,839 |
| Lincoln | 17,871 |
Which Homes Are Occupied or Vacant?
This chart changes from counts to percentages of all housing units in a county. Choose Occupied or Vacant to see the two complementary shares. For example, Lincoln's estimated 56.0% occupied share corresponds to a 44.0% vacant share. The bars start at zero and use the same 0–100% scale.
Chaves has the highest reported occupied share at 88.3%; Lincoln has the lowest at 56.0%. The difference is a reason to investigate local housing use, not proof that Lincoln has a large supply of market-ready homes. “Vacant” can include seasonal units and homes unavailable for rent or sale. Small county differences may also reflect survey uncertainty.
Lincoln County
Of all estimated housing units, 56.0% are occupied and 44.0% are vacant. The vacant share is not an available-home inventory.
Chaves County
Of all estimated housing units, 88.3% are occupied and 11.7% are vacant. Compare local market conditions before interpreting the difference.
Compare the Evidence
Occupied and Vacant Housing
Choose a measure and comparison order to explore the values. Bars start at zero; values remain visible beside every bar.
Occupied · A consistent zero-based scale makes the differences visible.
U.S. Census Bureau · 2020–2024 ACS 5-Year Estimates, table B25002. Percent of all housing units. Survey estimates have sampling uncertainty; vacant units may be seasonal or unavailable for sale or rent.
View All Values in a Table
| Area / Organization | Occupied | Vacant |
|---|---|---|
| Chaves | 88.3% | 11.7% |
| Eddy | 88% | 12% |
| Lea | 86.9% | 13.1% |
| Otero | 75% | 25% |
| Lincoln | 56% | 44% |
Who Owns or Rents Occupied Homes?
The third chart looks only at occupied housing units. Choose Owner-Occupied or Renter-Occupied to compare each county's tenure mix. A vacant unit is excluded here, so this chart answers a different question from the occupancy chart above. The two shares within a county add to about 100%, subject to rounding.
Lincoln has the highest reported owner-occupied share at 76.8% of occupied units, while Otero has the highest renter-occupied share at 33.0%. These are shares of existing occupied homes—not the number of rentals currently offered, the cost of owning or renting, or whether a household can find a suitable unit. Pair this view with prices, rents, income, and local listings.
Compare the Evidence
Ownership and Rental Housing
Choose a measure and comparison order to explore the values. Bars start at zero; values remain visible beside every bar.
Owner-Occupied · A consistent zero-based scale makes the differences visible.
U.S. Census Bureau · 2020–2024 ACS 5-Year Estimates, table B25003. Percent of occupied housing units only; vacant units are excluded. Survey estimates have sampling uncertainty.
View All Values in a Table
| Area / Organization | Owner-Occupied | Renter-Occupied |
|---|---|---|
| Lincoln | 76.8% | 23.2% |
| Eddy | 73.3% | 26.7% |
| Chaves | 71.3% | 28.7% |
| Lea | 71.2% | 28.8% |
| Otero | 67% | 33% |
What Kinds of Homes Make Up the Stock?
The structure chart compares the reported share of single-unit, multi-unit, mobile-home, and boat/RV/van categories by county. Select one form at a time; every bar is a percentage on the same 0–100% scale. This comparison has no confirmed reference year, so it provides historical context rather than a current inventory.
Single-unit homes account for 63–74% of the reported mix across the five counties. Mobile homes have a larger reported share in Otero (28%) and Lincoln (26%), while multi-unit structures range from 7% in Lincoln to 14% in Lea. The chart describes form, not quality, price, accessibility, or whether a unit has adequate utilities. A missing category value means it was not reported, not that the share is zero.
Compare the Evidence
The Mix of Housing Structures
Choose a measure and comparison order to explore the values. Bars start at zero; values remain visible beside every bar.
Single Unit · A consistent zero-based scale makes the differences visible.
Reference year not specified. Reported shares are historical context, not current estimates. Rounded categories may not total 100%; a missing value is not assumed to be zero.
View All Values in a Table
| Area / Organization | Single Unit | Multi-Unit | Mobile Home | Boat, Rv, or Van |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eddy | 74% | 10% | 15% | Not Reported |
| Chaves | 74% | 12% | 13% | 1% |
| Lea | 67% | 14% | 17% | 1% |
| Lincoln | 67% | 7% | 26% | Not Reported |
| Otero | 63% | 9% | 28% | Not Reported |
How Are Owner-Occupied Home Values Distributed?
The final chart uses 2020–2024 ACS estimates for owner-occupied homes only. Choose a value band to see what share of each county's owner-occupied units falls in that range. The bands were grouped from ACS table B25075. The bars show percentages within each county, not home counts or sale prices.
For example, 28.7% of Otero's owner-occupied homes are reported under $100,000, compared with 16.7% in Eddy. Looking below $200,000 across the first two bands gives 61.9% in Chaves and 60.5% in Otero, compared with 43.1% in Lincoln. These are owner-estimated values, not asking prices or rents. To assess affordability, compare current prices and rents with local incomes, financing costs, housing condition, and available inventory.
Compare the Evidence
Home Values and Housing Choice
Choose a measure and comparison order to explore the values. Bars start at zero; values remain visible beside every bar.
Under $100K · A consistent zero-based scale makes the differences visible.
U.S. Census Bureau · 2020–2024 ACS 5-Year Estimates, table B25075. Shares of owner-occupied housing units. Values are owner estimates, not sale prices; survey estimates have sampling uncertainty. View Source Definitions ↗
View All Values in a Table
| Area / Organization | Under $100k | $100k–$199k | $200k–$299k | $300k–$399k | $400k–$499k | $500k–$999k | $1m or More |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Otero | 28.7% | 31.8% | 19.1% | 11.8% | 4.3% | 4% | 0.2% |
| Chaves | 28.4% | 33.5% | 21.3% | 10.5% | 3.4% | 2.3% | 0.7% |
| Lea | 21.3% | 33.7% | 22.6% | 12.1% | 3.5% | 5.7% | 1.1% |
| Lincoln | 20.4% | 22.7% | 18.7% | 11.5% | 9.2% | 12.9% | 4.5% |
| Eddy | 16.7% | 28.8% | 27.4% | 12.5% | 6.3% | 6.8% | 1.3% |
Residential Mobility
Address changes show how many current residents lived elsewhere one year earlier. Moves can occur within the same county, so this measure is different from net population growth or in-migration.
Compare Address Changes Across Places
The interactive chart asks one clear question: what share of residents age one and older lived at a different address one year before their survey response? Choose “Different Address One Year Ago” to compare the move rate, or “Same Address One Year Ago” to see the complementary share. Each bar is a percentage of that place's current residents age one and older, not a count of people who crossed a county line.
Five county rows are followed by New Mexico and United States comparison rows. Eddy has the highest reported county move share at 15.3%; Lincoln has the lowest at 11.7%. New Mexico's rate is 11.9% and the U.S. rate is 12.3%. Those wider figures offer context rather than a target. Small differences need to be read with ACS sampling uncertainty, and this single five-year estimate does not establish a rising or falling trend.
Current Residents Age 1+
The denominator is people age one and older living in the named place when surveyed.
Any Different Address
A person may have moved nearby or from farther away. The chart does not separate those routes.
Five-Year Estimate, One-Year Question
Responses were collected from 2020 to 2024; each person was asked about their home one year earlier.
Lincoln County
Reported residents age one and older at a different address one year earlier.
Eddy County
The same measure, 3.6 percentage points above Lincoln's reported share.
Use Highest First or Lowest First to reorder the rows for the selected measure. The bars all begin at zero and keep the exact percentages beside them. Open the table below the chart to see both “different” and “same” address shares together. The two shares within a place add to about 100%, subject to rounding.
Compare the Evidence
How Often Residents Change Address
Choose a measure and comparison order to explore the values. Bars start at zero; values remain visible beside every bar.
Different Address One Year Ago · A consistent zero-based scale makes the differences visible.
U.S. Census Bureau · 2020–2024 ACS 5-Year Estimates, table B07003. Universe: residents age 1 and older at their current residence. “Different Address” includes local moves and moves from elsewhere; it is not net migration. Survey estimates have sampling uncertainty. Percentages are rounded. View Source Definitions ↗
View All Values in a Table
| Area / Organization | Different Address One Year Ago | Same Address One Year Ago |
|---|---|---|
| Eddy | 15.3% | 84.7% |
| Chaves | 13.2% | 86.8% |
| Lea | 13% | 87% |
| Otero | 12.8% | 87.2% |
| United States | 12.3% | 87.7% |
| New Mexico | 11.9% | 88.1% |
| Lincoln | 11.7% | 88.3% |
What the Evidence Means
Key Insights
These are regional planning implications, not claims about any individual resident or a project already delivered.
Vacancy Needs an Explanation
The 2020–2024 ACS shows a much lower occupied share in Lincoln than in Chaves. Seasonal use, condition, price, and location can all affect whether an unoccupied home could meet year-round needs. Local housing work must distinguish those possibilities.
There Is No Single Household Model
The reported mix of couple, single-householder, and nonfamily households varies by county. Housing choice and community services should reflect different life stages and household sizes rather than depend on one standard unit type.
Movement Is Not the Same as Growth
A resident can change address without leaving a county, and an arriving resident can fill an existing home. Pair mobility with population estimates, local permits, enrollment, and employer evidence before making a growth claim.
Housing Capacity Is a Place-Based Question
Counts and percentages identify where to investigate. A deliverable housing project also needs an appropriate site, water and utility capacity, financing, access to services, and a local sponsor prepared to carry it through.