ZIP code
27889
in Washington, North CarolinaPopulation 24,371
45.42/ 100
Ranked #21,969 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 31%)
Ranked #565 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (bottom 29%)
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.
Distance to a Superfund site
In this ZIP
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Superfund site — an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has listed for cleanup.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Lead in tap water
0 ppb
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
US1stDefinition & source ›
The lead level at the 90th percentile of tap-water samples reported by the public water systems serving this ZIP, in parts per billion — the EPA requires action above 15 ppb.
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 ›Lithium in drinking water
10 µg/L
in the bottom 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
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 ›Child-care access
0.54 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS91stDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.12 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST88thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 9.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS90thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Subsidized affordable housing
250 units
in the top 9.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST85thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Physician access
1.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS90thDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ offices 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 ›Radon
0.7 pCi/L
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The modeled typical indoor radon level for this area, in picocuries per liter — the EPA recommends fixing a home at 4 pCi/L or above.
Modeled from indoor-radon measurements. In Alaska and Hawaii, where those measurements are not published, a US Geological Survey geologic radon-potential category stands in — a coarser input, disclosed rather than hidden.
Full methodology ›The read
Washington, North Carolina (ZIP 27889), on the composite measure, lands in the bottom 31% nationally (21,969th) and the bottom 29% of North Carolina (565th).
What the numbers press hardest on defines much of the story here: distance to a Superfund site is at the national minimum, modeled disaster risk rests in the top 4.0% nationally, and modeled expected annual loss sits in the top 9.7% nationally. On the encouraging side, lead in tap water registers at the national minimum, lithium in drinking water lands in the bottom 7.7% nationally, and childcare resides in the top 9.1% nationally. Mental-health providers lies in the top 9.3% nationally, and subsidized affordable housing settles in the top 9.9% nationally. Physicians stands in the top 9.9% nationally, and modeled radon is in the bottom 2.2% nationally.
Set against the neighboring ZIPs, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In everyday language, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 27808, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 65%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 66%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 70%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 58%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 16%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 39%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 39%
8%
Disability
healthier than 18%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 28%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 66%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 49%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 56%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 40%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 54%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 21%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 37%
16%
Disability
healthier than 24%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 24%
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
2 of our published findings list 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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 75.0 ± 1.0 years. A median household income of $53,179 predicts 77.6 years — 2.6 years below.
Ranked #3,582 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 65.7; chronic-disease standing 15.6 — 50 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #2,488 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
27808
North Carolinashares a border
Score 52.67
Closest healthier
27814
North Carolinashares a border
Score 58.22
Similar health profile
29384
South Carolina98% similar profile
Score 45.83
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 | 33.8% | 30.5–37.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 44.9% | 40.9–49.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.3% | 8.5–10.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.5% | 10.3–13.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.0% | 8.2–10.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.2% | 9.2–11.5 |
| Depression among adults | 24.3% | 21.1–28.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 16.1% | 14.2–18.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.8% | 35.7–44.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 38.6% | 31.5–46.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.2% | 4.8–5.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 21.6% | 17.8–25.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.2% | 10.7–14.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.9% | 78.5–83.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 82.0% | 79.1–84.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.2% | 86.8–89.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 67.8% | 62.9–72.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 58.5% | 54.6–62.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.1% | 69.6–82.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.9% | 10.8–15.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.1% | 15.0–19.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 29.7% | 25.6–34.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.8% | 28.7–41.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 24.3% | 21.8–27.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.2% | 15.4–19.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.7% | 14.0–17.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.8% | 15.1–18.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 38.4% | 34.4–43.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.4% | 8.4–10.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.7% | 9.7–11.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 20.1% | 18.0–22.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.8% | 5.3–6.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.4% | 6.8–8.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.1% | 19.9–26.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 20.1% | 17.7–22.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 18.2% | 15.9–20.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.8% | 13.0–16.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.3% | 9.2–11.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.1% | 28.4–38.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 16.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 12.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 21.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 87.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 31.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 60.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 5.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 53.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 25.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 46.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $53,179 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $194,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $865 | $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 | 75.0 yr ± 0.51 | 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 0.51 years of 75.0, 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