ZIP code
28208
in Charlotte, North CarolinaPopulation 40,197
45.51/ 100
Ranked #21,855 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 32%)
Ranked #562 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (bottom 29%)
Ranked #95 of 113 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC ZIPs (bottom 16%)
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.
Subsidized affordable housing
2,248 units
in the top 0.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
45.2%
in the top 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
40 per million
in the top 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
16.5%
in the top 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
39.4%
in the bottom 5.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST5thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
23.1%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
24.9%
in the top 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
29.9%
in the top 6.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite measure, ZIP 28208, one of several in Charlotte, North Carolina sits in the bottom 32% nationally (21,855th) and the bottom 29% of North Carolina (562nd).
Where this area is stretched, the data is unambiguous: modeled short sleep lands in the top 2.8% nationally, air-toxics cancer risk resides in the top 2.5% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden lies in the top 4.7% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff settles in the top 5.1% nationally, homeownership stands in the bottom 5.1% nationally, and modeled housing insecurity is in the top 5.5% nationally. Modeled tooth loss rests in the top 7.4% nationally, and food insecurity sits in the top 6.1% nationally. Better still, subsidized affordable housing registers in the top 0.3% nationally, and lead in tap water lands at the national minimum.
Compared with the ZIPs that surround it, subsidized affordable housing runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain language, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. ZIP 28202, just across the boundary, ranks healthier 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.
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 89%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 54%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 46%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 39%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 24%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 20%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 33%
8%
Disability
healthier than 23%
7%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 69%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 65%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 44%
8%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 37%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 4%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 7%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 6%
11%
Disability
healthier than 31%
7%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 81%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 46%
21%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 20%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 9%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 5%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 38%
8%
Disability
healthier than 15%
7%
“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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 73.4 ± 1.2 years. A median household income of $55,431 predicts 77.7 years — 4.3 years below.
Ranked #5,249 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 73.4 ± 1.2 years. The 37 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 78.6 years — 5.2 years below them.
Ranked #3,418 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 73.4 ± 1.2 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
28202
North Carolinashares a border
Score 64.80
Closest healthier
28203
North Carolinashares a border
Score 68.30
Similar health profile
63114
Missouri94% similar profile
Score 40.74
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 | 24.1% | 21.3–26.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 38.0% | 34.4–41.5 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 4.6% | 4.1–5.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.2% | 10.7–13.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.0% | 5.4–6.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.4% | 6.6–8.3 |
| Depression among adults | 22.7% | 19.4–25.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.8% | 13.0–16.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 31.6% | 28.0–35.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.9% | 31.1–42.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.4% | 4.1–4.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 24.9% | 20.7–29.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 15.2% | 13.2–17.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.3% | 72.4–77.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.1% | 75.7–82.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.9% | 82.9–86.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 61.1% | 56.0–65.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 50.1% | 46.5–53.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.3% | 71.1–84.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.9% | 10.6–15.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.6% | 14.4–18.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 30.5% | 26.4–34.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 45.2% | 40.2–50.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 25.0% | 22.3–27.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.0% | 16.8–21.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.0% | 12.3–15.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.3% | 16.3–20.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 36.1% | 32.1–39.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.8–6.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.2% | 10.0–12.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.3% | 15.3–19.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.6–6.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.4% | 7.6–9.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 30.0% | 26.3–34.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 29.9% | 26.7–33.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 27.1% | 24.2–30.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 23.1% | 20.5–26.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 15.1% | 13.5–16.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 37.2% | 32.6–42.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 16.5% | 14.6–18.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 19.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 18.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 17.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 26.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 12.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 83.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 38.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 39.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 4.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 11.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 36.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 13.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 34.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $55,431 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $236,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $1,244 | $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 | 73.4 yr ± 0.61 | 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 0.61 years of 73.4, 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