ZIP code
28434
in Council, North CarolinaPopulation 710
41.78/ 100
Ranked #25,402 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 21%)
Ranked #677 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (bottom 14.7%)
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.
Child-care access
1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›Home broadband subscription
57.6%
in the bottom 2.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
50.2%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Stroke
5.9%
in the top 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
18.8%
in the top 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
5.6%
in the top 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Binge drinking
11.5%
in the bottom 4.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›Physician access
2.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ 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 ›Walkability
2 intersections/sq mi
in the bottom 7.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST4thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
9.9%
in the bottom 8.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS9thDefinition & 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 ›The read
Council, North Carolina (ZIP 28434) ranks in the bottom 21% nationally (25,402nd) and the bottom 14.7% of North Carolina (677th).
A number of readings press hard on the profile and set its tone: home broadband subscription is in the bottom 2.5% nationally, and modeled high blood pressure registers in the top 3.3% nationally. Modeled stroke lies in the top 4.7% nationally, and diabetes is in the top 6.0% nationally. Modeled energy burden registers in the top 4.3% nationally, and walkability lies in the bottom 7.4% nationally. On the brighter side, childcare is in the top 2.1% nationally, modeled binge drinking registers in the bottom 4.6% nationally, and physicians lies in the top 6.6% nationally. Modeled pfas is in the bottom 8.8% nationally.
For context, 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. Energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 28433, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 99%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 68%
13%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 52%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 9%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 4%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 29%
11%
Disability
healthier than 15%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 37%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 95%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 74%
8%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 59%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 51%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 11%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 3%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 10%
11%
Disability
healthier than 19%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 22%
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
28337
North Carolinashares a border
Score 40.36
Closest healthier
28433
North Carolinashares a border
Score 41.92
Similar health profile
63462
Missouri97% similar profile
Score 43.41
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 | 33.9% | 30.4–37.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 50.2% | 45.7–54.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.0% | 7.2–8.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.4% | 11.0–13.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.0% | 8.0–10.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.7% | 8.5–11.0 |
| Depression among adults | 22.1% | 18.9–25.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 18.8% | 16.6–21.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.7% | 35.2–44.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 44.0% | 35.7–52.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.9% | 5.4–6.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 22.3% | 18.1–26.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.0% | 9.2–13.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 82.1% | 79.5–84.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 83.7% | 80.7–86.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.4% | 87.8–90.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.6% | 61.2–71.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 51.0% | 46.8–55.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.0% | 69.1–83.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 11.5% | 9.4–14.0 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 18.1% | 15.6–21.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 32.4% | 27.4–37.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 41.7% | 34.5–49.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 26.5% | 23.3–30.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.3% | 15.3–19.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.0% | 14.1–18.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.6% | 14.7–18.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 39.9% | 35.2–44.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.6% | 7.7–9.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.0% | 9.8–12.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 21.7% | 19.1–24.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.4% | 5.7–7.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.2% | 7.4–9.2 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 27.3% | 23.2–31.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 23.6% | 20.1–27.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 21.3% | 18.1–24.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.1% | 15.6–20.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 12.1% | 10.6–13.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.8% | 29.3–40.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 13.1% | 11.3–15.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 14.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 26.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 19.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 13.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 10.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 57.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 30.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 63.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 4.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 86.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 39.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 61.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $49,643 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $169,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | — | $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 | 78.5 yr ± 1.69 | 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 1.69 years of 78.5, 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