ZIP code
28277
in Charlotte, North CarolinaPopulation 73,882
69.15/ 100
Ranked #738 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 2.4%)
Ranked #10 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (top 1.3%)
Ranked #2 of 113 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC ZIPs (top 1.8%)
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.
Obesity
24.3%
in the bottom 4.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
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 ›Energy-cost burden
1.1%
in the bottom 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & 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 ›PFAS in drinking water
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFAS — man-made “forever chemicals” that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down — were detected in EPA testing.
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 ›Lack of transportation
4.7%
in the bottom 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
4.8%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
11.3%
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
8.4%
in the bottom 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
4.3%
in the bottom 4.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Median household income
$128,627
in the top 7.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›The read
Judged by its overall standing, ZIP 28277, one of several in Charlotte, North Carolina sits in the top 2.4% healthiest ZIPs nationally (738th) and the top 1.3% of North Carolina (10th).
The measures that most flatter this area set the tone for the rest: modeled obesity registers in the bottom 4.6% nationally, lead in tap water is at the national minimum, and modeled energy burden lies in the bottom 1.6% nationally. Modeled transportation registers in the bottom 5.1% nationally, independent living disability is in the bottom 1.9% nationally, and fair or poor health lies in the bottom 2.2% nationally. Distance to an emergency room registers at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Modeled mobility disability is in the bottom 4.0% nationally, and coronary heart disease lies in the bottom 4.6% nationally. Against that, PFAS in drinking water registers at the national maximum.
Placed beside its immediate neighbors, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put plainly, lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. PFAS in drinking water is the family of man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. Energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. A healthier nearby ZIP overall is ZIP 28207, about 6.2 miles away.
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 95%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 96%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 93%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 86%
8%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 70%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 49%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 40%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 97%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 96%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 78%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 90%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 97%
8%
Disability
healthier than 98%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 66%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 49%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 32%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 95%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 89%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 64%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 88%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 95%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 98%
8%
Disability
healthier than 95%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 55%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 50%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
“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.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 81.9 ± 1.2 years. The 35 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 78.2 years — 3.6 years above them.
Ranked #489 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 38.4 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 81.9 ± 1.2 years.
Ranked #1,701 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
28104
North Carolinashares a border
Score 64.34
Closest healthier
28207
North Carolinaabout 6.2 mi away
Score 72.78
Similar health profile
30622
Georgia99% similar profile
Score 64.94
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 | 21.6% | 18.9–24.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 27.9% | 24.5–31.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.5% | 6.8–8.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.3% | 8.2–10.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.3% | 3.8–4.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.0% | 3.5–4.4 |
| Depression among adults | 21.7% | 18.6–24.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.4% | 7.1–9.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.7% | 29.7–37.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 24.3% | 19.7–28.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.3% | 2.1–2.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.3% | 5.0–7.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.2% | 5.2–7.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.4% | 70.7–77.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.4% | 76.0–82.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.6% | 89.2–91.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.4% | 60.6–69.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 71.7% | 68.6–74.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 81.1% | 74.5–86.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.6% | 12.9–18.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.0% | 6.8–9.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 16.0% | 13.3–18.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.0% | 29.5–38.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 11.3% | 9.8–12.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.0% | 11.4–14.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.0% | 7.9–10.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 9.9% | 8.7–11.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 21.7% | 18.7–24.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.1% | 4.5–5.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 4.8% | 4.3–5.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 8.4% | 7.2–9.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.2% | 2.0–2.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.0% | 2.7–3.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.1% | 17.3–23.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.9% | 6.7–9.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 4.9% | 4.1–5.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.1% | 6.1–8.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.7% | 4.1–5.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.0% | 24.9–33.5 |
| 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 | 4.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 68.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 97.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.5% | 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) | 2.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 24.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 46.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 13.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 39.8 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $128,627 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $560,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $1,882 | $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 | 81.9 yr ± 0.59 | 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 0.59 years of 81.9, 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