ZIP code
28665
in Purlear, North CarolinaPopulation 2,483
43.37/ 100
Ranked #24,039 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 25%)
Ranked #628 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (bottom 21%)
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.
Tree cover
81.5%
in the top 4.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Unemployment rate
13.5%
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 9.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Hearing disability
10.8%
in the top 10.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS89thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
0.33%
in the bottom 12.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS13thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›Median household income
$45,685
in the bottom 9.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST12thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Mammography
70.2%
in the bottom 14.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS15thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Fiber broadband
88.2%
in the top 17% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS83rdDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
42.1%
in the top 15% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS85thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
20 per million
in the bottom 25% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS25thDefinition & 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 ›The read
Judged by its overall standing, Purlear, North Carolina (ZIP 28665) sits in the bottom 25% nationally (24,039th) and the bottom 21% of North Carolina (628th).
A balanced showing across the data, with a few readings each side: modeled tree cover is in the top 4.4% nationally, arsenic lies in the bottom 10.4% nationally, and transportation noise registers in the bottom 12.6% nationally. On the other hand, unemployment is in the top 4.8% nationally, modeled industrial-pollution burden lies in the top 9.8% nationally, and modeled hearing disability registers in the top 10.9% nationally. Modeled coronary heart disease is in the top 10.5% nationally, and poverty lies in the top 14.3% nationally. Modeled stroke registers in the top 12.8% nationally, and fatal road crashes is in the top 15% nationally.
Put plainly, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. A healthier nearby ZIP overall is ZIP 28618, 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 79%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 62%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 65%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 49%
13%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 12%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 38%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 18%
8%
Disability
healthier than 15%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 30%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 65%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 91%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 45%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 16%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 36%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 32%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 12%
8%
Disability
healthier than 19%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 15%
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 ›
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.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 79.2; chronic-disease standing 12.0 — 67 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #1,243 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
28618
North Carolinashares a border
Score 57.41
Closest healthier
28626
North Carolinashares a border
Score 56.91
Similar health profile
27046
North Carolina98% similar profile
Score 42.21
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 | 35.1% | 31.4–39.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 43.3% | 38.9–47.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.7% | 9.6–11.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.4% | 10.0–12.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 12.1% | 10.5–13.8 |
| Depression among adults | 27.8% | 23.8–32.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.1% | 13.0–17.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 42.1% | 37.4–46.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 38.7% | 30.6–47.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.1% | 4.6–5.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 20.1% | 16.8–23.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.2% | 9.2–13.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.8% | 78.0–83.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.0% | 77.7–84.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.4% | 85.4–89.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 67.6% | 62.6–72.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 60.2% | 56.6–63.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.2% | 62.3–77.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.4% | 10.9–16.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 18.5% | 15.7–21.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 29.1% | 24.5–34.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.9% | 25.7–38.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 24.5% | 21.2–28.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.7% | 15.6–20.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.9% | 14.7–19.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.6% | 15.3–19.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 39.2% | 34.4–44.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.6–12.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.7–12.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 20.2% | 17.5–23.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.7% | 5.0–6.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.3–7.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.6% | 18.1–25.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.0% | 14.2–20.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 15.5% | 12.9–18.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.4% | 9.6–13.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.8% | 7.6–10.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.6% | 27.5–38.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.0% | 6.8–9.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 22.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 11.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 27.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 11.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 13.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 23.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 82.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 2.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 62.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 19.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 49.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $45,685 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $167,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $684 | $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 | 77.5 yr ± 0.99 | 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 0.99 years of 77.5, 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