ZIP code
28091
in Lilesville, North CarolinaPopulation 2,285
41.81/ 100
Ranked #25,380 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 21%)
Ranked #675 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (bottom 14.9%)
Ranked #104 of 113 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC ZIPs (bottom 8.0%)
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.
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 ›Unemployment rate
12.3%
in the top 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
0.9 mi
in the bottom 6.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST6thUS7thDefinition & 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 ›High blood pressure
46%
in the top 9.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
4.9%
in the top 10.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS89thDefinition & 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 ›Humid extreme heat
118 days/year
in the top 14.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS86thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year when modeled heat stress — temperature, humidity, sun, and wind combined — reaches levels hard on the body outdoors.
Full methodology ›Dry extreme heat
14.4 days/year
in the top 29% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS71stDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, Lilesville, North Carolina (ZIP 28091) lands in the bottom 21% nationally (25,380th) and the bottom 14.9% of North Carolina (675th).
The signals balance out across the profile, strengths against concerns: lead in tap water settles at the national minimum, and modeled binge drinking resides in the bottom 10.6% nationally. Modeled arsenic registers in the bottom 12.6% nationally. Set against that, unemployment rests in the top 6.0% nationally, distance to a Superfund site stands in the bottom 6.8% nationally, and modeled high blood pressure lies in the top 9.8% nationally. Modeled stroke lands in the top 10.1% nationally, PFOA in drinking water sits in the top 11.2% nationally, and PFOS in drinking water is in the top 11.3% nationally. Modeled energy burden settles in the top 10.8% nationally.
A note on the 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. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. PFOA in drinking water is one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 27306, just across the boundary, ranks better overall.
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.
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 59%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 58%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 42%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 43%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 15%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 7%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 32%
8%
Disability
healthier than 17%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 26%
5%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 44%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 44%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 41%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 20%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 7%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 21%
11%
Disability
healthier than 23%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 23%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 28%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 80%
14%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 55%
13%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 6%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 3%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 19%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 35%
8%
Disability
healthier than 9%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 6%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 18%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
27306
North Carolinashares a border
Score 47.85
Closest healthier
28338
North Carolinashares a border
Score 46.03
Similar health profile
27864
North Carolina99% similar profile
Score 41.89
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 | 32.9% | 29.2–36.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 46.0% | 41.4–50.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.3% | 7.4–9.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.9% | 10.4–13.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.8% | 7.9–9.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.2% | 8.9–11.6 |
| Depression among adults | 24.0% | 20.3–27.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 16.5% | 14.3–18.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.9% | 34.4–43.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 41.0% | 32.3–49.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.3% | 4.8–5.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 20.9% | 17.2–25.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.4% | 9.5–13.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.2% | 77.5–82.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.6% | 78.3–84.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.2% | 85.3–88.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 67.8% | 62.4–72.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 56.1% | 52.1–60.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 76.3% | 68.3–83.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.6% | 10.1–15.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 18.3% | 15.7–21.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 30.6% | 25.7–35.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 37.5% | 30.6–44.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 25.2% | 21.9–28.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.2% | 16.1–20.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.8% | 13.8–17.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.6% | 15.5–19.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 39.5% | 34.6–44.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.9% | 7.9–10.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.0% | 9.7–12.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 20.3% | 17.6–22.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.5% | 6.7–8.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 26.8% | 23.0–30.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 21.8% | 18.8–25.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 19.7% | 16.9–22.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.1% | 13.9–18.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.1% | 9.8–12.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.5% | 29.2–40.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 11.2% | 9.8–12.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 11.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 32.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 11.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 11.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 12.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 73.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 4.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 59.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 20.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 39.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $52,917 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $152,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $854 | $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 | 75.4 yr ± 1.72 | 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 1.72 years of 75.4, 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