ZIP code
28747
in Lake Toxaway, North CarolinaPopulation 2,021
52.15/ 100
Ranked #13,253 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 41%)
Ranked #303 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (top 38%)
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.
Arsenic in groundwater
0.77%
in the bottom 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
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 ›Tree cover
83.2%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
94.2%
in the top 9.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Recreation access
0.95 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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 ›Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility
10.9 mi
in the top 12.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS87thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest facility that handles enough hazardous chemicals to require an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
11.5%
in the bottom 12.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS13thDefinition & 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 ›Civic-institution access
0.47 per 1,000 residents
in the top 13.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS86thDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations 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 ›Distance to a nursing home
7.6 mi
in the top 18% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS82ndDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare- or Medicaid-certified nursing home.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 19% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS19thDefinition & 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 ›Fatal road crashes
4.9 per 100,000 residents per year
in the bottom 20% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST10thUS20thDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›The read
Lake Toxaway, North Carolina (ZIP 28747), overall, ranks in the top 41% healthiest ZIPs nationally (13,253rd) and the top 38% of North Carolina (303rd).
This area's measures are easy to read as a mixed set: modeled arsenic settles in the bottom 0.3% nationally, and tree cover is in the top 3.7% nationally. Modeled extreme heat sits at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Homeownership lands in the top 9.8% nationally, and recreation lies in the top 9.9% nationally. Distance to a community health center stands at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility rests in the top 12.6% nationally, and modeled pfas registers in the bottom 12.8% nationally. Civic resides in the top 13.6% nationally. Set against that, modeled hearing disability settles in the top 15% nationally.
Defined simply, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility is a plant handling large amounts of hazardous chemicals that must file an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases. 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. ZIP 28712, just across the boundary, comes out healthier overall.
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
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 94%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 79%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 78%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 80%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 43%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 49%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 24%
21%
Disability
healthier than 33%
7%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 85%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 73%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 72%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 63%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 95%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 46%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 35%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 36%
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 94.2 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 24.0 — 70 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #1,059 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
28708
North Carolinashares a border
Score 45.67
Closest healthier
28712
North Carolinashares a border
Score 57.14
Similar health profile
28657
North Carolina98% similar profile
Score 52.20
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 | 34.6% | 30.8–38.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 42.9% | 38.1–47.5 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 11.4% | 10.2–12.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.7% | 9.3–12.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.4% | 8.1–10.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.1% | 8.4–11.9 |
| Depression among adults | 25.5% | 21.5–29.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.0% | 11.8–16.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.3% | 36.5–46.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.7% | 27.6–44.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.6% | 4.0–5.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.1% | 9.0–13.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.6% | 7.7–12.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.7% | 77.7–83.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.8% | 78.4–84.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.7% | 87.1–90.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.8% | 64.3–74.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 63.0% | 59.0–67.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.2% | 69.0–83.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.8% | 11.2–16.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.0% | 12.0–18.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.5% | 19.4–29.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.2% | 25.4–39.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.9% | 17.3–24.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.8% | 13.6–18.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.9% | 12.6–17.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.9% | 12.7–17.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 35.4% | 30.0–40.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.3% | 9.0–11.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.9% | 7.5–10.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.5% | 14.4–20.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.6% | 3.9–5.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.7% | 4.9–6.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 19.5% | 16.0–23.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.6% | 10.0–15.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.8% | 8.4–13.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.0% | 7.4–10.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.1% | 5.9–8.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.4% | 24.4–34.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.3% | 5.2–7.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 15.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 15.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 11.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 27.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.1% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 18.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 94.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 2.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 51.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 28.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 48.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $66,000 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $294,600 | $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 | 79.6 yr ± 1.81 | 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 1.81 years of 79.6, 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