ZIP code
28227
in Mint Hill, North CarolinaPopulation 60,482
53.26/ 100
Ranked #11,700 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 36%)
Ranked #262 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (top 33%)
Ranked #49 of 113 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC ZIPs (top 43%)
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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
530 units
in the top 4.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
68.7%
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS95thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
39 per million
in the top 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 9.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS91stDefinition & 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 ›The read
Mint Hill, North Carolina (ZIP 28227), in overall standing, comes out in the top 36% healthiest ZIPs nationally (11,700th) and the top 33% of North Carolina (262nd).
A balanced showing across the data, with a few readings each side: subsidized affordable housing resides in the top 4.2% nationally. Distance to an emergency room sits at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Modeled arsenic stands in the bottom 12.2% nationally, and grocery resides in the top 12.9% nationally. Distance to a nursing home sits at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Lead in tap water stands in the bottom 15% nationally. On the other hand, distance to a Superfund site resides at the national minimum, and modeled pfas sits in the top 4.8% nationally. Modeled air-toxics cancer risk stands in the top 7.4% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden resides in the top 9.4% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Pfas is the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down; here a modeled estimate of the chance a private well contains them. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 28025, 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 70%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 60%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 41%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 57%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 48%
8%
Disability
healthier than 47%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 35%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 83%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 71%
8%
Disability
healthier than 64%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 70%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 84%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 59%
16%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 19%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 21%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 38%
11%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 63%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 68%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 88%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 75%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 49%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 49%
14%
Disability
healthier than 49%
7%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 26%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 34%
11%
“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.
Highest-risk tenth
Air toxics and the years between the two ends of the risk scale
Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is 39.0 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 78.8 ± 1.0 years.
Ranked #1,617 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
28025
North Carolinashares a border
Score 54.95
Closest healthier
28075
North Carolinashares a border
Score 63.41
Similar health profile
23228
Virginia91% similar profile
Score 53.28
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 | 25.8% | 22.8–28.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.9% | 31.2–38.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.2% | 6.5–7.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.9% | 9.6–12.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.2% | 5.5–6.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.9% | 6.1–7.6 |
| Depression among adults | 23.3% | 20.1–26.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.3% | 10.7–14.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.7% | 30.8–38.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 31.9% | 26.6–37.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.6% | 3.4–3.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.2% | 10.7–15.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 13.6% | 11.8–15.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.9% | 72.6–78.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.0% | 75.6–82.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.1% | 85.4–88.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.8% | 59.0–68.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 60.0% | 56.4–63.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.6% | 70.6–83.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.1% | 11.6–16.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.8% | 11.9–15.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.7% | 22.0–29.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.1% | 34.3–43.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.3% | 17.9–22.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.8% | 14.9–18.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.1% | 11.6–14.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.6% | 13.8–17.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 32.6% | 28.9–36.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.8% | 6.0–7.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.8% | 7.8–9.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.6% | 12.9–16.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.1–4.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.6–6.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.1% | 21.8–28.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 19.7% | 17.3–22.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 15.9% | 13.9–18.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.7% | 13.8–17.7 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.1% | 9.0–11.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.2% | 28.9–38.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.5% | 9.1–11.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 18.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 12.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 31.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 31.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 70.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 4.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 17.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 44.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 15.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 39.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $77,115 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $349,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $1,453 | $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 | 78.8 yr ± 0.53 | 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 0.53 years of 78.8, 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