Caring means having a connection with others and being concerned for their wellbeing. It can be expressed in many ways — from helping an older adult cross the street to fighting a house fire. Some people prefer a more hands-on approach to show they care through their choice of employment or volunteering, while others open their pocketbooks to donate toward causes that help those in need.
Americans donated nearly $500 billion in 2022, which sounds like a lot, but when you factor in the cost of inflation, it equates to a 3.4% decline in donations compared to 2021. Even if you can’t afford to give away your income – especially during the challenging conditions of the current economy – there are plenty of other ways to show compassion to others. You can volunteer your time and expertise as well.
In order to identify the areas that care the most, WalletHub compared the 100 largest cities across 38 key indicators of a compassionate spirit. Our data set ranges from the share of sheltered homeless persons to the volunteering hours per capita to the share of income donated to charity.
Cassandra Happe, WalletHub Analyst
Main Findings
Most Caring Cities in the U.S.
Overall Rank | City | Total Score | Caring for the Community Rank | Caring for the Vulnerable Rank | Caring in the Workforce Rank |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Madison, WI | 68.70 | 8 | 6 | 5 |
2 | Boston, MA | 68.61 | 20 | 12 | 1 |
3 | Virginia Beach, VA | 67.08 | 1 | 13 | 31 |
4 | New York, NY | 65.40 | 18 | 24 | 4 |
5 | San Diego, CA | 64.61 | 21 | 1 | 57 |
6 | Chesapeake, VA | 64.54 | 5 | 22 | 30 |
7 | Colorado Springs, CO | 64.26 | 30 | 7 | 24 |
8 | Fremont, CA | 64.05 | 14 | 10 | 39 |
9 | Portland, OR | 63.79 | 31 | 8 | 29 |
10 | Scottsdale, AZ | 63.54 | 3 | 5 | 89 |
11 | Lincoln, NE | 63.33 | 22 | 14 | 22 |
12 | Pittsburgh, PA | 63.33 | 15 | 34 | 8 |
13 | Gilbert, AZ | 62.54 | 2 | 17 | 85 |
14 | San Francisco, CA | 62.53 | 57 | 2 | 37 |
15 | Denver, CO | 62.35 | 71 | 3 | 19 |
16 | Seattle, WA | 61.82 | 38 | 4 | 54 |
17 | Plano, TX | 61.61 | 7 | 11 | 71 |
18 | Jersey City, NJ | 61.54 | 33 | 52 | 6 |
19 | Irvine, CA | 61.18 | 13 | 15 | 62 |
20 | Aurora, CO | 61.02 | 50 | 20 | 14 |
21 | Chula Vista, CA | 61.01 | 12 | 27 | 58 |
22 | St. Paul, MN | 60.59 | 36 | 51 | 9 |
23 | Chicago, IL | 60.58 | 45 | 30 | 15 |
24 | San Jose, CA | 60.51 | 27 | 9 | 81 |
25 | Lexington-Fayette, KY | 59.99 | 60 | 49 | 3 |
26 | Anchorage, AK | 59.66 | 77 | 28 | 12 |
27 | Omaha, NE | 59.65 | 25 | 35 | 35 |
28 | Chandler, AZ | 59.45 | 4 | 38 | 84 |
29 | Minneapolis, MN | 59.36 | 58 | 36 | 13 |
30 | Boise, ID | 59.13 | 26 | 29 | 55 |
31 | Washington, DC | 58.96 | 54 | 16 | 44 |
32 | Los Angeles, CA | 58.63 | 62 | 18 | 36 |
33 | Louisville, KY | 58.34 | 52 | 48 | 18 |
34 | Honolulu, HI | 58.31 | 10 | 42 | 59 |
35 | Norfolk, VA | 58.22 | 28 | 64 | 27 |
36 | Santa Ana, CA | 57.98 | 37 | 43 | 41 |
37 | Newark, NJ | 57.78 | 23 | 92 | 10 |
38 | Mesa, AZ | 57.71 | 6 | 57 | 73 |
39 | Philadelphia, PA | 57.68 | 44 | 71 | 7 |
40 | Columbus, OH | 57.57 | 46 | 60 | 20 |
41 | Raleigh, NC | 57.53 | 9 | 69 | 47 |
42 | Sacramento, CA | 57.42 | 61 | 21 | 56 |
43 | Fort Wayne, IN | 57.34 | 39 | 66 | 16 |
44 | Indianapolis, IN | 57.28 | 69 | 39 | 21 |
45 | Buffalo, NY | 56.96 | 68 | 78 | 2 |
46 | Austin, TX | 56.78 | 70 | 26 | 48 |
47 | Anaheim, CA | 56.63 | 47 | 44 | 50 |
48 | Irving, TX | 55.71 | 29 | 56 | 78 |
49 | Reno, NV | 55.64 | 32 | 37 | 91 |
50 | Cincinnati, OH | 55.45 | 49 | 65 | 38 |
51 | Phoenix, AZ | 55.18 | 51 | 31 | 90 |
52 | Baltimore, MD | 55.05 | 64 | 67 | 28 |
53 | Fresno, CA | 54.80 | 59 | 55 | 53 |
54 | Garland, TX | 54.57 | 17 | 73 | 83 |
55 | Henderson, NV | 54.56 | 11 | 41 | 98 |
56 | Tampa, FL | 54.43 | 48 | 53 | 69 |
57 | Jacksonville, FL | 54.38 | 53 | 47 | 72 |
58 | Charlotte, NC | 54.30 | 42 | 63 | 66 |
59 | Oakland, CA | 54.19 | 87 | 25 | 46 |
60 | St. Petersburg, FL | 53.94 | 66 | 40 | 69 |
61 | Durham, NC | 53.81 | 73 | 83 | 11 |
62 | Long Beach, CA | 53.80 | 67 | 59 | 52 |
63 | Fort Worth, TX | 53.75 | 41 | 61 | 82 |
64 | Nashville, TN | 53.72 | 75 | 50 | 43 |
65 | Riverside, CA | 53.68 | 65 | 23 | 96 |
66 | Milwaukee, WI | 53.49 | 55 | 95 | 23 |
67 | Bakersfield, CA | 53.45 | 63 | 19 | 97 |
68 | St. Louis, MO | 52.44 | 91 | 32 | 33 |
69 | Arlington, TX | 52.40 | 40 | 76 | 77 |
70 | Las Vegas, NV | 52.19 | 35 | 46 | 98 |
71 | Glendale, AZ | 52.09 | 34 | 87 | 87 |
72 | Atlanta, GA | 51.77 | 78 | 58 | 60 |
73 | Lubbock, TX | 51.67 | 85 | 82 | 17 |
74 | El Paso, TX | 51.59 | 19 | 89 | 86 |
75 | Hialeah, FL | 51.55 | 56 | 77 | 74 |
76 | Oklahoma City, OK | 51.54 | 80 | 68 | 45 |
77 | Kansas City, MO | 50.83 | 81 | 81 | 34 |
78 | Toledo, OH | 50.04 | 84 | 86 | 32 |
79 | Tucson, AZ | 49.88 | 74 | 72 | 65 |
80 | Wichita, KS | 49.74 | 96 | 45 | 40 |
81 | North Las Vegas, NV | 49.72 | 24 | 84 | 98 |
82 | Cleveland, OH | 49.52 | 83 | 94 | 26 |
83 | Dallas, TX | 49.34 | 72 | 85 | 80 |
84 | Corpus Christi, TX | 48.81 | 88 | 80 | 49 |
85 | San Antonio, TX | 48.77 | 79 | 79 | 76 |
86 | Albuquerque, NM | 48.65 | 99 | 62 | 25 |
87 | Orlando, FL | 48.41 | 89 | 33 | 93 |
88 | Miami, FL | 48.31 | 82 | 75 | 74 |
89 | Laredo, TX | 48.14 | 16 | 100 | 64 |
90 | Stockton, CA | 47.00 | 93 | 54 | 95 |
91 | Greensboro, NC | 46.75 | 94 | 70 | 68 |
92 | New Orleans, LA | 46.27 | 92 | 91 | 51 |
93 | Winston-Salem, NC | 45.52 | 43 | 97 | 88 |
94 | Baton Rouge, LA | 45.25 | 97 | 88 | 42 |
95 | San Bernardino, CA | 44.81 | 90 | 74 | 94 |
96 | Houston, TX | 44.66 | 86 | 93 | 92 |
97 | Detroit, MI | 44.49 | 76 | 99 | 79 |
98 | Memphis, TN | 43.86 | 95 | 96 | 61 |
99 | Tulsa, OK | 43.63 | 98 | 90 | 63 |
100 | Birmingham, AL | 38.39 | 100 | 98 | 67 |
Note: With the exception of “Total Score,” all of the columns in the table above depict the relative rank of that city, where a rank of 1 represents the best conditions for that metric category.
In-Depth Look at the Most Caring Cities
Madison, WI
Madison, WI is the most caring city for 2024, and its residents are very willing to give their money to help others. Madison residents search for “charitable donations” on Google more than people in any other city, and they’re in the top 10 when it comes to per-capita online giving.
In addition, people in Madison provide great physical care for both other residents and their animal companions. The city ranks first in the nation for both doctors and EMTs per 100,000 residents, and fourth for pet shelters and rescue services (per the square root of the population).
With a population so willing to provide their money and time to those in need, it’s no wonder that Madison also ranks high among WalletHub’s picks for the happiest and safest cities.
Boston, MA
The second-most caring city in America is Boston, as it turns out Bostonians have hearts of gold hiding behind their reputation for rudeness. Boston residents donate more money online per capita than anyone else in the U.S.
Boston also cares for the environment, something that dates back to at least 1634 when the city established America’s oldest public park. That environmentally conscious behavior continues into the modern age, as Boston ranks as the most energy-efficient city in the country.
The City of Champions ranks as one of the best cities when it comes to sheltering the homeless and keeping its population insured, too. This shows that the city cares for the physical wellbeing of its residents.
Virginia Beach, VA
Virginia Beach is the third-most caring city, in part due to the fact that its residents rank first in the nation for volunteering hours, proving that it’s much more than just a tourist trap and a hangout for Navy SEALs. The city also has one of the highest shares of residents who fundraise or sell items to raise money for charity.
Despite its status as a party city, Virginia Beach actually does a great job keeping residents safe. It has one of the lowest crime rates in the country, both for property crime and violent crime. This indicates that people care about their neighbors and that the city provides ample care to those in need who might otherwise turn to crime. The fact that the city has a low poverty rate backs this up.
- Highest
- 1. Jacksonville, FL
- 2. Milwaukee, WI
- 3. Raleigh, NC
- 4. Portland, OR
- T-5. Minneapolis, MN
- T-5. St. Paul, MN
- Lowest
- T-67. Henderson, NV
- T-67. North Las Vegas, NV
- T-70. Miami, FL
- T-70. Hialeah, FL
- 72. San Antonio, TX
- 73. Orlando, FL
- Highest
- T-1. Memphis, TN
- T-1. Tulsa, OK
- T-1. Birmingham, AL
- 4. Lubbock, TX
- 5. Winston-Salem, NC
- Lowest
- T-96. San Diego, CA
- T-96. Chula Vista, CA
- 98. Sacramento, CA
- 99. Laredo, TX
- 100. Honolulu, HI
- Most
- T-1. Baltimore, MD
- T-1. Portland, OR
- T-1. Milwaukee, WI
- T-1. Virginia Beach, VA
- T-1. Norfolk, VA
- T-1. Chesapeake, VA
- Fewest
- T-69. New York, NY
- T-69. Newark, NJ
- T-69. Jersey City, NJ
- T-72. Miami, FL
- T-72. Hialeah, FL
- 74. Jacksonville, FL
- Highest
- 1. Santa Ana, CA
- 2. Honolulu, HI
- 3. San Bernardino, CA
- 4. Stockton, CA
- 5. Detroit, MI
- Lowest
- 96. Boston, MA
- 97. Scottsdale, AZ
- 98. Atlanta, GA
- 99. Washington, DC
- 100. New York, NY
- Highest
- 1. Milwaukee, WI
- 2. Buffalo, NY
- 3. Boston, MA
- 4. Cincinnati, OH
- 5. Lexington-Fayette, KY
- Lowest
- T-90. Oakland, CA
- T-90. Fremont, CA
- 92. Tucson, AZ
- 93. Raleigh, NC
- 94. San Jose, CA
- Lowest
- 1. Fremont, CA
- 2. Gilbert, AZ
- 3. Plano, TX
- 4. San Jose, CA
- 5. Irvine, CA
- Highest
- 96. Memphis, TN
- 97. Birmingham, AL
- 98. Buffalo, NY
- 99. Detroit, MI
- 100. Cleveland, OH
- Most
- 1. Wichita, KS
- 2. Buffalo, NY
- 3. Boston, MA
- 4. Madison, WI
- 5. Washington, DC
- Fewest
- 96. Phoenix, AZ
- 97. Mesa, AZ
- 98. Chandler, AZ
- 99. Long Beach, CA
- 100. Scottsdale, AZ
- Most
- 1. Boston, MA
- 2. Portland, OR
- 3. Anchorage, AK
- T-4. Los Angeles, CA
- T-4. Long Beach, CA
- Fewest
- T-96. Las Vegas, NV
- T-96. Henderson, NV
- T-96. North Las Vegas, NV
- 99. Houston, TX
- 100. Winston-Salem, NC
Ask the Experts
When we need a helping hand, we sometimes need to seek assistance from our local government and community. We asked a panel of experts for their ideas on how cities can provide the care that residents need and address other significant challenges. Click on the experts’ profiles to read their bios and thoughts on the following key questions:
- Should people who care for children or other relatives receive financial compensation from the government?
- How can local authorities encourage citizens to be more caring?
- Foster care has largely replaced orphanages in the United States. Is this trend good?
- How can local communities strike the right balance between care services provided by the government versus nonprofits, charities and religious organizations?
- When evaluating most caring cities in America, what are the top five indicators?
Ask the Experts
Methodology
In order to determine the most caring cities in America, WalletHub compared the 100 most populated cities across three key dimensions: 1) Caring for the Community, 2) Caring for the Vulnerable and 3) Caring in the Workforce.
We then evaluated those dimensions using 38 relevant metrics listed below with their corresponding weights. Each metric was graded on a 100-point scale, with 100 representing the highest level of caring. Data for metrics marked with an asterisk (*) were available only at the state level. For metrics marked with two asterisks (**), we used the square root of the population to calculate the population size to avoid overcompensating for minor differences across cities.
Finally, we determined each city’s weighted average across all metrics to calculate its overall score and used the resulting scores to rank-order our sample.
In determining our sample, we considered only the city proper in each case and excluded cities in the surrounding metro area.
Caring for the Community – Total Points: 40
- Violent Crime Rate: Quadruple Weight (~6.81 Points)
- Property Crime Rate: Triple Weight (~5.11 Points)
- Average Alcohol-Impaired Driving Fatalities per Capita: Half Weight (~0.85 Points)
- Driving Fatalities per Capita: Half Weight (~0.85 Points)
- Pedestrian Fatality Rate: Half Weight (~0.85 Points)
- Care for the Environment: Double Weight (~3.40 Points)
Note: The share of workers who carpool was used for this metric. - WalletHub “Energy Efficiency” Ranking: Half* Weight (~0.85 Points)
Note: This metric is based on WalletHub’s “Most & Least Energy Efficient States" ranking. - Civic Engagement: Full* Weight (~1.70 Points)
Note: The share of citizens who voted in the 2020 elections was used for this metric. - Favors for Neighbors: Triple Weight (~5.11 Points)
Note: This metric measures the share of residents who do favors for their neighbors. - Presence of “Built for Zero” Communities: Full Weight (~1.70 Points)
Note: This binary metric measures the presence or absence of “Built for Zero” Communities in a city. Built for Zero (formerly Zero: 2016) is a rigorous national change effort working to help a core group of committed communities end veteran and chronic homelessness. Coordinated by Community Solutions, the national effort supports participants in developing real time data on homelessness, optimizing local housing resources, tracking progress against monthly goals, and accelerating the spread of proven strategies. - Food & Clothing Distribution to the Needy: Full Weight (~1.70 Points)
Note: This metric measures the share of residents who collect or distribute food or clothing for the needy. - Share of Residents Who Fundraise or Sell Items to Raise Money: Full Weight (~1.70 Points)
- Share of Income Donated to Charity: Full Weight (~1.70 Points)
- Online Giving per Capita: Full Weight (~1.70 Points)
- Volunteering Hours per Capita: Double Weight (~3.40 Points)
- Share of Registered Volunteer Fire Departments: Full* Weight (~1.70 Points)
- Google Search Interest for “Charitable Donations”: Half Weight (~0.85 Points)
Note: This metric measures the real intent of the population to find information using the following search terms: “volunteer”, “non profit organizations”, “charity”, “charitable donations” and “charitable organizations”. “Real intent” is measured using the average monthly search volumes for those specific terms.
Caring for the Vulnerable – Total Points: 40
- Child Poverty Rate: Triple Weight (~7.06 Points)
- Adult Poverty Rate: Triple Weight (~7.06 Points)
- Adoption Rate: Half* Weight (~1.18 Points)
Note: This metric measures the number of children adopted through public agencies per adult population. - Availability of Paid Family Leave: Full* Weight (~2.35 Points)
Note: This binary metric considers the presence or absence of paid family leave in the state. - Share of Sheltered Homeless Persons: Double Weight (~4.71 Points)
- Rehabilitation Centers per Capita**: Half Weight (~1.18 Points)
- Pet Shelters & Rescue Services per Capita**: Double Weight (~4.71 Points)
- Animal Protection Laws Ranking: Full* Weight (~2.35 Points)
Note: This metric is based on the “2022 U.S. Animal Protection Laws Rankings” report. - Disability-Friendliness of Employers: Double Weight (~4.71 Points)
Note: This metric measures the share of people with disabilities who are employed. - Uninsured Rate: Double Weight (~4.71 Points)
Caring in the Workforce – Total Points: 20
- Residents Who Work in Community & Social Services per Capita: Double Weight (~3.33 Points)
- Physicians per Capita: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)
- Nurses per Capita: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)
- Special-Education Teachers per School-Aged People with Disabilities: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)
- Teachers’ Care for Students’ Well-Being: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)
Note: Student-teacher ratio was used for this metric. - Counselors’ Care for Students’ Well-Being: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)
Note: Student-counselor ratio was used for this metric. - Childcare Workers per Total Number of Children: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)
Note: Childcare workers attend to the basic needs of children, such as dressing, bathing, feeding, and overseeing play. They may help younger children prepare for kindergarten or assist older children with homework. - Substance Abuse, Behavioral Disorder and Mental-Health Counselors per Capita: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)
- Personal-Care Aides per Capita: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)
- Firefighters per Capita: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)
- Paramedics per Capita: Full Weight (~1.67 Points)
Sources: Data used to create this ranking were collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Chronicle of Philanthropy, Administration for Children & Families, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, National Center for Education Statistics, Animal Legal Defense Fund, National Conference of State Legislatures, U.S. Fire Administration, Google Ads, Community Solutions, Yelp, Internal Revenue Service, AmeriCorps and WalletHub research.
WalletHub experts are widely quoted. Contact our media team to schedule an interview.