ZIP code
27839
in Halifax, North CarolinaPopulation 3,279
36.90/ 100
Ranked #28,583 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 10.9%)
Ranked #745 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (bottom 6.1%)
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.
Self-care disability
7.9%
in the top 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Stroke
6.4%
in the top 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
51.8%
in the top 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›PFOS in drinking water
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOS, one of the most common “forever chemicals,” was detected in EPA testing.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
28.3%
in the top 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Fatal road crashes
61 per 100,000 residents per year
in the top 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
20.1%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Outer-floodplain exposure
14.2%
in the top 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 0.2%-annual-chance flood band — the “500-year” zone, a lower but real 1-in-500 yearly chance.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Vision disability
9.8%
in the top 5.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Grocery access
0.28 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Cross-source signals
Health need and barriers to care documented here
On our reading, this ZIP code carries the overlap at its severe level: severe means at least four of the six health-need readings and at least four of the six access barriers apply to the same place.
These are two separate readings of public data that both apply to this place — never a claim that one causes the other, never a severity score, and never a statement about any person who lives here.
Health need documented here
- Food insecurity
- Housing insecurity
- Adults reporting fair or poor health
- Chronic conditions
Barriers to reaching care
- Distance to the nearest emergency room
- Thin local supply of doctors
- Thin local supply of pharmacies
- Households with no vehicle
A reading appears below only where this ZIP code is among the most-affected 10% of US ZIP codes on it — one national bar, the same for every ZIP in the country.
See the full care-deserts analysis →The read
Halifax, North Carolina (ZIP 27839), by its composite score, sits in the bottom 10.9% nationally (28,583rd) and the bottom 6.1% of North Carolina (745th).
The data opens plainly on what marks this place: modeled self-care disability resides in the top 3.0% nationally, and stroke is in the top 2.5% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure lands in the top 2.0% nationally, and PFOS in drinking water stands at the national maximum. Modeled tooth loss registers in the top 4.2% nationally, fatal road crashes settles in the top 2.2% nationally, and modeled diabetes sits in the top 3.7% nationally. Outer-floodplain exposure lies in the top 2.8% nationally, and modeled vision disability rests in the top 5.3% nationally. More encouragingly, grocery resides in the top 4.0% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, PFOS in drinking water is a common one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. Outer-floodplain exposure is land with a lower but real 1-in-500 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "500-year floodplain". For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 27845, just across the boundary. The area further shows documented health need overlapping with barriers to reaching care, sitting in the most-affected 10% of US ZIP codes on several need measures and several access barriers.
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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 86%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 62%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 40%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 60%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 6%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 2%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 14%
11%
Disability
healthier than 6%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 26%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 74%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 83%
8%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 55%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 6%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 2%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 20%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 3%
11%
Disability
healthier than 7%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 22%
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.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 86.4; chronic-disease standing 6.3 (bottom 10%) — 80 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #489 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
27823
North Carolinashares a border
Score 28.10
Closest healthier
27845
North Carolinashares a border
Score 39.07
Similar health profile
31824
Georgia100% similar profile
Score 39.95
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 | 32.8% | 29.6–37.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 51.8% | 47.8–57.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.0% | 6.3–7.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.5% | 10.3–13.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.8% | 8.7–11.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.2% | 9.8–12.9 |
| Depression among adults | 20.3% | 17.5–24.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 20.1% | 17.8–23.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.3% | 35.3–44.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 44.6% | 37.4–54.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 6.4% | 5.7–7.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 28.3% | 24.0–32.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 15.1% | 12.1–18.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.6% | 77.0–82.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.8% | 78.8–85.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.5% | 84.4–88.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.1% | 58.1–67.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 50.9% | 47.2–54.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.4% | 71.5–84.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.3% | 10.3–15.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 21.5% | 18.4–25.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 35.4% | 30.2–41.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 40.4% | 33.8–47.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 30.3% | 26.5–34.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.7% | 15.7–20.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.0% | 15.0–19.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.6% | 16.4–21.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 41.3% | 36.6–47.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.8% | 7.9–10.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.5% | 11.0–14.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 23.0% | 20.2–26.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 7.9% | 7.0–9.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 9.8% | 8.7–11.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 30.1% | 25.6–34.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 30.7% | 26.3–35.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 29.3% | 24.9–33.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 22.5% | 19.2–25.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 15.1% | 13.1–17.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 35.3% | 29.9–41.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 17.0% | 14.5–19.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 19.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 20.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 12.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 15.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 67.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 28.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 69.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 2.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 52.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 20.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 50.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $48,094 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $94,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $926 | $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 | 76.5 yr ± 2.09 | 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 2.09 years of 76.5, 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