ZIP code
20755
in Fort George G Meade, MarylandPopulation 11,225
60.88/ 100
Ranked #4,210 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 13.2%)
Ranked #175 of 458 Maryland ZIPs (top 38%)
Ranked #90 of 157 Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD ZIPs (bottom 43%)
Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.
What defines this ZIP
Metrics where this ZIP sits in the tails of the national distribution — the ones that most set it apart. Select any tile for its definition and methodology.
High cholesterol
23.2%
in the bottom 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
0.00%
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
2.1%
in the bottom 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Slow internet speeds
93.6%
in the top 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes whose fastest available download speed is under 10 Mbps.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
2.8%
in the bottom 0.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
21.5%
in the bottom 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Stroke
1.4%
in the bottom 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
5.4%
in the bottom 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
21.8%
in the top 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
5.8%
in the bottom 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›The read
Fort George G Meade, Maryland (ZIP 20755), overall, ranks in the top 13.2% healthiest ZIPs nationally (4,210th) and the top 38% of Maryland (175th).
This area's measures are easy to read as a mixed set: modeled high cholesterol is in the bottom 1.1% nationally, coronary heart disease sits in the bottom 1.1% nationally, and hearing disability lands in the bottom 0.7% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure lies in the bottom 1.6% nationally, stroke stands in the bottom 1.2% nationally, and diabetes rests in the bottom 1.3% nationally. Modeled mobility disability registers in the bottom 1.2% nationally. Set against that, homeownership resides at the national minimum, and slow internet speeds settles in the top 0.6% nationally. Modeled binge drinking is in the top 2.0% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, slow internet speeds runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. ZIP 20701, just across the boundary, comes out healthier overall. This area also sits on the healthier half of the national range on at least seven of the ten good-life measures tracked here, from quiet and green space to nearby care, a combination reached by about one in twenty-five US ZIP codes.
What’s driving this score
Nine domains make up the ZipVitals Score — here is how this ZIP does on each, and how much each one counts. Compare it against the US, this state and the Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 99%
21%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 65%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 57%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 42%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 49%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 32%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 15%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 32%
11%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 99%
21%
Disability
healthier than 91%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 68%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 31%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 4%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 10%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 16%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 39%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 99%
21%
Disability
healthier than 88%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 66%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 21%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 25%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 2%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 10%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 18%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 31%
5%
“Share” is how much of this ZIP’s score the domain accounts for. Percentages are rounded; higher is healthier in every domain. How the score works, and who it compares you with ›
Findings that name this ZIP
One of our published findings lists this ZIP code. Each finding compares one published measure against a stated benchmark, and names only the ZIP codes whose estimates are reliable enough to rank. See all surprising findings.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 32.3; chronic-disease standing 98.7 (top 10%) — 66 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,063 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
20701
Marylandshares a border
Score 63.31
Closest healthier
21076
Marylandshares a border
Score 64.92
Similar health profile
20670
Maryland99% similar profile
Score 63.24
How these were chosen: only ZIPs with a published Score appear — a nearby ZIP with too little data to score won’t. Nearby means closest by distance between ZIP boundaries, which can cross state lines. A similar health profile is a close match across the nine Score domains, not similar demographics. Distances are measured between ZIP boundaries — ZIPs that touch share a border. How distance is measured
Evidence
Every measure this page draws on, by source. Collapsed by default — the full data stays in the page for search engines either way.
Health OutcomesCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Arthritis among adults | 12.5% | 11.2–13.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 21.5% | 19.5–23.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 3.1% | 2.8–3.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.2% | 9.1–11.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 2.1% | 1.9–2.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 2.8% | 2.5–3.2 |
| Depression among adults | 22.3% | 19.9–25.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 5.4% | 4.8–6.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 23.2% | 21.1–25.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 33.8% | 30.0–37.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 1.4% | 1.3–1.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.2% | 5.9–8.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.6% | 7.3–10.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 54.2% | 51.2–57.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.3% | 69.2–75.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.2% | 81.1–85.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 57.9% | 54.3–61.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 62.5% | 59.6–65.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 83.9% | 79.9–87.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 21.8% | 19.0–24.7 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.1% | 8.5–11.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 17.4% | 15.1–19.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 42.2% | 38.5–46.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 13.8% | 12.1–15.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.2% | 16.3–20.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.2% | 8.2–10.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.3% | 12.5–16.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 22.9% | 20.2–25.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 2.8% | 2.5–3.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.3–6.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 5.8% | 5.1–6.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.0% | 1.8–2.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.8–3.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.6% | 21.7–27.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.2% | 12.2–16.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.3–11.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.5% | 11.7–15.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.2% | 7.2–9.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 38.3% | 34.7–42.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.2% | 7.2–9.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MD median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 4.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 6.7% (1.1–19.3%) n=459 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 3.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 4.8% (0.0–13.1%) n=459 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.3% (0.5–16.6%) n=463 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 50.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 37.3% (15.0–64.4%) n=463 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.9% (0.0–8.6%) n=457 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.2% (0.0–12.4%) n=457 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.3% (81.2–100.0%) n=457 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 48.2% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 27.0% (12.0–41.8%) n=457 |
| Homeownership rate | 0.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 82.1% (49.9–98.5%) n=457 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.7% (0.0–4.0%) n=457 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 6.2% (0.0–26.4%) n=464 |
| Single-parent households | 29.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (34.0–73.3%) n=450 |
| Population 65+ | 2.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.0% (10.9–33.1%) n=464 |
| Median age | 25.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.8 yr (34.2–57.2) n=460 |
| Median household income | $103,261 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $106,181 ($62,879–$172,423) n=419 |
| Median home value | — | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $423,400 ($215,180–$683,660) n=427 |
| Median gross rent | $2,435 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,626 ($958–$2,415) n=339 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MD median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
More ZIPs to explore ▾More ZIPs to explore ▴
How these lists were built: they draw only from ZIPs that have a published Score, so ZIPs with too little data to score are not listed. Distance-based lists use distance between ZIP boundaries with no state filter, so an out-of-state ZIP can appear. Statistically similar means a close match across the nine Score domains, not a demographic match: the measure is the cosine similarity between two ZIPs’ domain scores, taken over the domains both ZIPs have data for and only where that overlap covers at least six of the nine — and where no ZIP clears that minimum-overlap floor, that list is left out rather than filled with a weak match. How distance is measured