ZIP code
28801
in Asheville, North CarolinaPopulation 14,691
54.21/ 100
Ranked #10,433 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 33%)
Ranked #245 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (top 31%)
Ranked #20 of 29 Asheville, NC ZIPs (bottom 31%)
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.
Outpatient-care access
1.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.66 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics 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 ›Physician access
6.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Transit access
12 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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 ›Dental provider access
2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental 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 ›Child-care access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Recreation access
2.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Civic-institution access
1.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
940 units
in the top 1.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Grocery access
0.33 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets 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. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite health measure, ZIP 28801, one of several in Asheville, North Carolina ranks in the top 33% healthiest ZIPs nationally (10,433rd) and the top 31% of North Carolina (245th).
A number of measures pull each way for this area: outpatient rests in the top 0.5% nationally, and mental-health providers stands in the top 0.5% nationally. Physicians lies in the top 0.8% nationally, and transit lands in the top 0.8% nationally. Dental providers sits in the top 1.1% nationally, childcare is in the top 1.3% nationally, and recreation settles in the top 1.3% nationally. Civic resides in the top 1.5% nationally, subsidized affordable housing registers in the top 1.6% nationally, and grocery rests in the top 3.2% nationally.
Read against the ZIPs closest to it, outpatient runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To spell things out, subsidized affordable housing is the main federal tax-credit program (HUD) funding affordable rental housing, counted as local units it supports. Close by, ZIP 28803, just across the boundary, ranks 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. Compare it against the US, this state and the Asheville, NC metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.8%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 76%
11%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 58%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 45%
13%
Disability
healthier than 40%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 50%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 29%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 25%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 75%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.7%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 68%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 76%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 55%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 27%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 25%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 61%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.00%
16%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 32%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 11%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 18%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 7%
8%
Disability
healthier than 25%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 14%
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
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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 74.9 ± 1.7 years. A median household income of $58,438 predicts 78.0 years — 3.0 years below.
Ranked #4,154 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 74.9 ± 1.7 years. The 47 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 78.5 years — 3.6 years below them.
Ranked #2,764 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
28803
North Carolinashares a border
Score 58.54
Closest healthier
28804
North Carolinashares a border
Score 63.08
Similar health profile
28072
North Carolina89% similar profile
Score 52.38
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 | 26.0% | 23.2–29.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.9% | 33.2–40.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.5% | 6.8–8.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.2% | 10.0–12.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.7% | 6.0–7.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.9% | 7.0–8.8 |
| Depression among adults | 26.3% | 22.8–30.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.4% | 10.9–14.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.1% | 29.3–37.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.3% | 29.0–42.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.9% | 3.6–4.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 18.6% | 15.8–21.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.8% | 8.3–11.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.5% | 72.9–78.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.9% | 74.4–81.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.6% | 83.8–87.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.1% | 60.5–69.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 59.9% | 56.6–63.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.4% | 71.9–84.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.4% | 12.8–18.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.0% | 13.0–17.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.9% | 19.4–26.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.5% | 26.5–36.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.0% | 17.7–22.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.5% | 15.6–19.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.1% | 11.7–14.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.2% | 14.4–18.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 33.0% | 29.1–37.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.4% | 8.4–10.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.0% | 13.2–16.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.3–5.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.6–6.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.2% | 18.1–24.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.6% | 15.2–20.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 16.9% | 14.6–19.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.1% | 11.3–15.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.6–11.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.4% | 26.7–36.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.0% | 8.6–11.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 27.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 17.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 54.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 18.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 85.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 38.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 37.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 53.9% | 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 | 43.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $58,438 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $548,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $1,232 | $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 | 74.9 yr ± 0.88 | 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 0.88 years of 74.9, 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