ZIP code
28031
in Cornelius, North CarolinaPopulation 31,733
64.86/ 100
Ranked #2,057 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 6.5%)
Ranked #42 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (top 5.3%)
Ranked #13 of 113 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC ZIPs (top 11.6%)
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.
Lack of transportation
4.6%
in the bottom 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
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 ›Obesity
25.8%
in the bottom 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
7.4%
in the bottom 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
43.4%
in the top 5.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
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 ›Dental provider access
1.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental 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 ›Housing insecurity
6.8%
in the bottom 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
11.9%
in the bottom 3.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
40 per million
in the top 6.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.4%
in the bottom 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS4thDefinition & 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 ›The read
By its overall health score, Cornelius, North Carolina (ZIP 28031) lands in the top 6.5% healthiest ZIPs nationally (2,057th) and the top 5.3% of North Carolina (42nd).
Taken together, the profile's clearest strengths surface right away: modeled transportation lands in the bottom 4.4% nationally, and lead in tap water registers at the national minimum. Modeled obesity sits in the bottom 6.8% nationally, and food insecurity rests in the bottom 5.0% nationally. Dental providers is in the top 5.8% nationally, modeled housing insecurity stands in the bottom 6.0% nationally, and modeled fair or poor health settles in the bottom 3.2% nationally. Modeled energy burden lies in the bottom 3.6% nationally. Against that, floodplain exposure resides in the top 5.4% nationally, and modeled air-toxics cancer risk lands in the top 6.5% nationally.
Weighed against the ZIPs nearby, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To translate a couple of terms, lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Floodplain exposure is land with about a 1-in-100 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "100-year floodplain". Overall, the nearest healthier neighbor is ZIP 28036, 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 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC 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 89%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 98%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 89%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 91%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 74%
8%
Disability
healthier than 93%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 46%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 49%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 9%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 93%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 98%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 87%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 88%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 93%
8%
Disability
healthier than 96%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 28%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 8%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 37%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 83%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 95%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 93%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 90%
8%
Disability
healthier than 90%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 59%
14%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
in the bottom 0.00%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 23%
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
3 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.
Above what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 83.3 ± 1.9 years. A median household income of $113,368 predicts 80.6 years — 2.7 years above.
Ranked #545 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 83.3 ± 1.9 years. The 38 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 76.9 years — 6.4 years above them.
Ranked #24 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Highest-risk tenth
Air toxics and the years between the two ends of the risk scale
Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is 40.0 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 83.3 ± 1.9 years.
Ranked #504 of the 4,173 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by modeled air-toxics risk, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
28036
North Carolinashares a border
Score 67.21
Closest healthier
28078
North Carolinashares a border
Score 65.66
Similar health profile
73025
Oklahoma99% similar profile
Score 60.66
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 | 25.0% | 22.0–27.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 30.0% | 26.5–33.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.2% | 8.3–10.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.9% | 8.6–11.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.5–5.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.7% | 4.2–5.3 |
| Depression among adults | 23.7% | 20.3–27.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.6% | 7.3–9.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.1% | 31.2–39.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 25.8% | 21.1–30.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.6% | 2.3–2.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.5% | 5.1–8.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.3% | 5.4–7.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.3% | 72.6–79.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.0% | 76.7–82.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.8% | 89.4–92.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.9% | 64.3–73.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 72.2% | 69.1–75.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.4% | 73.7–85.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.4% | 13.5–19.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.7% | 7.4–10.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 15.9% | 13.2–18.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.3% | 28.7–37.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 11.9% | 10.3–13.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.6% | 11.9–15.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.8% | 8.6–11.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 10.5% | 9.3–11.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 23.7% | 20.5–27.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.0% | 5.3–6.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–5.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.4% | 8.1–10.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.4% | 2.2–2.7 |
| 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 | 18.4% | 15.8–21.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.4% | 6.3–8.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 5.0% | 4.2–5.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.8% | 5.8–7.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.6% | 4.1–5.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.2% | 24.2–32.6 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.5% | 3.9–5.2 |
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 | 5.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 62.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 27.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 71.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 9.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 53.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 20.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 44.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $113,368 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $547,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $1,747 | $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 | 83.3 yr ± 0.98 | 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 0.98 years of 83.3, 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