ZIP code
21617
in Centreville, MarylandPopulation 10,428
61.05/ 100
Ranked #4,096 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 12.8%)
Ranked #170 of 458 Maryland ZIPs (top 37%)
Ranked #87 of 157 Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD ZIPs (bottom 45%)
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.
Grocery access
0.28 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›Mental-health provider access
0.19 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics located inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
9.2%
in the bottom 7.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.19 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Outpatient-care access
0.47 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS91stDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics located inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Mammography
81%
in the top 6.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST68thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
6.5%
in the bottom 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST20thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 17% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS83rdDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
18.1%
in the top 18% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS82ndDefinition & 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 ›The read
Overall, Centreville, Maryland (ZIP 21617) places in the top 12.8% healthiest ZIPs nationally (4,096th) and the top 37% of Maryland (170th).
The standout strengths in the data are the natural place to begin: grocery settles in the top 4.1% nationally, and mental-health providers sits in the top 4.8% nationally. Modeled pfas lies in the bottom 7.2% nationally, and elder services rests in the top 7.7% nationally. Outpatient resides in the top 9.0% nationally, modeled mammography is in the top 6.7% nationally, and modeled tooth loss lands in the bottom 6.3% nationally. Distance to a community health center stands at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Household income registers in the top 10.7% nationally, and poverty settles in the bottom 12.6% nationally.
Beside the areas that surround it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For readers new to these terms, pfas is the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down; here a modeled estimate of the chance a private well contains them. Distance to a community health center is a federally funded (HRSA) community health center serving everyone regardless of ability to pay. Among nearby ZIPs, the nearest healthier one overall is ZIP 21658, just across the boundary.
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 72%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 87%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 80%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 86%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 73%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 68%
8%
Disability
healthier than 83%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 83%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 52%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 61%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 77%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 87%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 60%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 51%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 40%
8%
Disability
healthier than 57%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 45%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 95%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 84%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 44%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 51%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 50%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 40%
8%
Holding it back
Risk Behavior
healthier than 39%
11%
Disability
healthier than 38%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 35%
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.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 81.6 ± 2.5 years. The 49 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 78.1 years — 3.6 years above them.
Ranked #506 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
21620
Marylandshares a border
Score 56.06
Closest healthier
21658
Marylandshares a border
Score 62.76
Similar health profile
23321
Virginia99% similar profile
Score 59.47
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 | 29.3% | 26.7–31.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.3% | 34.1–40.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.1% | 9.2–11.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.0% | 8.9–11.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.3% | 5.7–7.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.5% | 5.6–7.3 |
| Depression among adults | 22.6% | 19.8–25.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.0% | 9.6–12.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.6% | 33.2–39.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 29.1% | 24.7–33.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 3.0–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.5% | 5.3–7.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.2% | 5.2–7.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.3% | 75.7–80.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.4% | 74.2–80.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.0% | 88.7–91.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.9% | 66.8–74.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 67.3% | 64.2–70.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 81.0% | 75.7–85.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.1% | 15.3–20.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.5% | 9.7–13.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 20.2% | 17.3–23.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.5% | 29.1–37.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.5% | 13.5–17.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.1% | 13.4–16.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.1% | 10.6–13.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.6% | 10.3–13.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 25.9% | 22.8–28.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.8% | 6.0–7.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.4% | 5.7–7.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.7% | 10.1–13.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.0% | 2.7–3.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.6% | 18.6–24.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.6% | 8.1–11.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.4% | 6.2–8.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.7% | 7.4–10.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.5% | 4.8–6.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.0% | 28.0–36.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.6% | 4.8–6.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MD median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 3.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 6.7% (1.1–19.3%) n=459 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 4.8% (0.0–13.1%) n=459 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.3% (0.5–16.6%) n=463 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 40.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 37.3% (15.0–64.4%) n=463 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.9% (0.0–8.6%) n=457 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.2% (0.0–12.4%) n=457 |
| Broadband subscription | 90.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.3% (81.2–100.0%) n=457 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 30.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 27.0% (12.0–41.8%) n=457 |
| Homeownership rate | 77.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 82.1% (49.9–98.5%) n=457 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.7% (0.0–4.0%) n=457 |
| Foreign-born population | 2.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 6.2% (0.0–26.4%) n=464 |
| Single-parent households | 53.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (34.0–73.3%) n=450 |
| Population 65+ | 18.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.0% (10.9–33.1%) n=464 |
| Median age | 41.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.8 yr (34.2–57.2) n=460 |
| Median household income | $116,898 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $106,181 ($62,879–$172,423) n=419 |
| Median home value | $483,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $423,400 ($215,180–$683,660) n=427 |
| Median gross rent | $1,338 | $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 at birth | 81.6 yr ± 1.25 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 79.5 yr (75.7–82.7) n=451 |
About the ± — it’s this estimate’s give-or-take (statisticians call it the standard error). The true life expectancy for this ZIP most likely falls within 1.25 years of 81.6, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.
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