ZIP code
28685
in Traphill, North CarolinaPopulation 2,181
38.95/ 100
Ranked #27,432 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 14.5%)
Ranked #720 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (bottom 9.3%)
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.
Fiber broadband
100%
at the national maximum
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Unemployment rate
13.5%
in the top 4.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS93rdDefinition & 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
11.4%
in the top 7.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
10.3%
in the top 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Child-care access
0.55 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Tree cover
68.9%
in the top 9.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST89thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
12.2%
in the top 10.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Cognitive disability
19.7%
in the top 10.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS89thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
0.40%
in the bottom 13.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS14thDefinition & 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 ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, Traphill, North Carolina (ZIP 28685) ranks in the bottom 14.5% nationally (27,432nd) and the bottom 9.3% of North Carolina (720th).
Strengths and concerns sit side by side across the measures here: fiber broadband is at the national maximum, and childcare stands in the top 8.9% nationally. Modeled extreme heat settles at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Modeled tree cover lies in the top 9.7% nationally. On the other hand, unemployment resides in the top 4.9% nationally, modeled industrial-pollution burden lands in the top 6.8% nationally, and modeled hearing disability registers in the top 7.0% nationally. Modeled coronary heart disease sits in the top 7.7% nationally, independent living disability rests in the top 10.3% nationally, and cognitive disability is in the top 10.7% nationally.
In plainer terms, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 28621, 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 83%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 61%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 10%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 24%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 29%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 37%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 10%
8%
Disability
healthier than 8%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 38%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 70%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 89%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 14%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 24%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 11%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 15%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 3%
8%
Disability
healthier than 9%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 25%
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 83.0; chronic-disease standing 10.2 — 73 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #900 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
28621
North Carolinashares a border
Score 46.56
Closest healthier
28627
North Carolinashares a border
Score 46.72
Similar health profile
27355
North Carolina99% similar profile
Score 41.35
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 | 34.8% | 30.9–38.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 43.6% | 39.0–48.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.1% | 9.0–11.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.6% | 10.1–13.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.3% | 9.1–11.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 12.9% | 11.0–15.0 |
| Depression among adults | 28.5% | 24.3–32.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.4% | 13.2–17.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.6% | 37.0–46.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.4% | 31.2–47.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–6.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 21.8% | 18.2–26.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.6% | 9.6–16.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.7% | 76.7–82.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.7% | 75.8–83.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.2% | 82.7–87.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.5% | 58.3–68.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 52.2% | 48.2–56.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.5% | 64.6–79.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.8% | 11.1–16.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 20.8% | 17.5–24.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 31.2% | 25.6–36.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.0% | 27.5–40.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 26.8% | 22.8–30.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.2% | 16.7–21.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.9% | 15.4–20.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 19.7% | 16.9–22.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 42.1% | 36.5–47.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.4% | 10.0–12.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.2% | 10.5–14.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 21.4% | 18.1–24.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.2% | 5.3–7.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.6% | 6.6–8.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.4% | 19.6–27.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 19.1% | 15.6–23.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 17.2% | 13.9–21.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.6% | 10.4–15.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.4–11.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.3% | 29.0–40.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.7% | 7.4–10.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 24.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 21.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 33.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 7.7% | 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 | 2.3% | 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) | 14.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 84.3% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 49.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 18.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 35.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $46,406 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $123,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $776 | $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 | 75.4 yr ± 1.47 | 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 1.47 years of 75.4, 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