ZIP code
27358
in Summerfield, North CarolinaPopulation 15,685
62.83/ 100
Ranked #3,070 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 9.6%)
Ranked #59 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (top 7.5%)
Ranked #4 of 41 Greensboro-High Point, NC ZIPs (top 9.8%)
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.
Median household income
$138,717
in the top 5.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.5%
in the bottom 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›Mammography
81.3%
in the top 5.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
5.1%
in the bottom 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
8.4%
in the bottom 9.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
94.5%
in the top 9.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
7.3%
in the bottom 9.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
4.8%
in the bottom 10.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS11thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
14.0%
in the bottom 9.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
12.1%
in the bottom 12.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS12thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›The read
Summerfield, North Carolina (ZIP 27358), by its composite score, sits in the top 9.6% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,070th) and the top 7.5% of North Carolina (59th).
Where the data is kindest to this area, a few readings lead the way: household income lies in the top 5.3% nationally, and modeled energy burden rests in the bottom 5.1% nationally. Modeled mammography resides in the top 5.8% nationally, and transportation is in the bottom 8.7% nationally. Modeled food insecurity lands in the bottom 9.2% nationally, homeownership stands in the top 9.2% nationally, and modeled housing insecurity registers in the bottom 9.5% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff settles in the bottom 10.9% nationally, fair or poor health sits in the bottom 9.5% nationally, and short sleep lies in the bottom 12.4% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 27310, 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 Greensboro-High Point, NC 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 74%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 65%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 89%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 91%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 66%
8%
Disability
healthier than 85%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 43%
5%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 37%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 85%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 87%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 88%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 88%
8%
Disability
healthier than 92%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 48%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 55%
5%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 23%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 83%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 68%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 85%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 85%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 90%
8%
Disability
healthier than 95%
7%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 10%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 13%
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 83.4 ± 2.9 years. The 49 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 77.2 years — 6.2 years above them.
Ranked #32 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
27025
North Carolinashares a border
Score 46.37
Closest healthier
27310
North Carolinashares a border
Score 66.02
Similar health profile
20119
Virginia99% similar profile
Score 59.62
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 | 27.6% | 24.7–30.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.5% | 31.0–38.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.2% | 8.4–10.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.0% | 8.9–11.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.8% | 5.1–6.8 |
| Depression among adults | 24.3% | 21.3–27.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.1% | 8.9–11.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.4% | 33.7–41.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 32.8% | 27.7–38.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.0% | 2.7–3.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.4% | 9.6–13.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.5% | 5.4–7.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.0% | 75.0–80.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.9% | 78.0–83.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.5% | 89.2–91.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 67.2% | 63.0–70.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.4% | 67.6–73.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 81.3% | 76.0–85.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.6% | 13.2–18.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.9% | 9.1–12.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 18.2% | 15.4–21.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.6% | 26.3–34.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 14.0% | 12.3–16.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.1% | 12.5–15.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.2% | 9.9–12.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.7% | 10.2–13.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.4% | 24.1–30.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.8% | 6.1–7.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.3–6.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.2% | 9.7–12.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.9% | 2.6–3.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 19.2% | 16.6–22.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.4% | 7.0–9.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.0% | 5.0–7.2 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.3% | 6.2–8.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.1% | 4.5–5.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.0% | 25.2–33.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.8% | 4.1–5.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 54.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 12.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 94.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 11.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 53.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 14.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 43.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $138,717 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $444,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $1,022 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $957 ($715–$1,575) n=687 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 83.4 yr ± 1.49 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 77.3 yr (74.6–80.8) n=747 |
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 1.49 years of 83.4, 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