ZIP code
28804
in Woodfin, North CarolinaPopulation 25,776
63.08/ 100
Ranked #2,919 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 9.2%)
Ranked #56 of 793 North Carolina ZIPs (top 7.1%)
Ranked #2 of 29 Asheville, NC ZIPs (top 6.9%)
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.
Short sleep
26.4%
in the bottom 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
66.1%
in the top 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Arsenic in groundwater
1.3%
in the bottom 9.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS9thDefinition & 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 ›Housing insecurity
7.3%
in the bottom 9.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Lead in tap water
0.0002 ppb
in the bottom 9.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
US10thDefinition & source ›
The lead level at the 90th percentile of tap-water samples reported by the public water systems serving this ZIP, in parts per billion — the EPA requires action above 15 ppb.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.6%
in the bottom 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS7thDefinition & 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 ›Colon-cancer screening
73.1%
in the top 7.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 11.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS89thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Obesity
28.5%
in the bottom 12.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS13thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
4.9%
in the bottom 12.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS12thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›The read
In its overall standing, Woodfin, North Carolina (ZIP 28804) lands in the top 9.2% healthiest ZIPs nationally (2,919th) and the top 7.1% of North Carolina (56th).
This area's measures are easy to read as a mixed set: modeled short sleep settles in the bottom 1.0% nationally, arsenic is in the bottom 9.3% nationally, and housing insecurity sits in the bottom 9.5% nationally. Lead in tap water lands in the bottom 9.6% nationally, and modeled energy burden lies in the bottom 6.8% nationally. Modeled extreme heat stands at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Modeled colon screening rests in the top 7.0% nationally, and obesity registers in the bottom 12.7% nationally. Set against that, modeled pfas resides in the top 5.7% nationally, and expected annual loss settles in the top 11.0% nationally.
Put simply, 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. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. On the overall standing, ZIP 28757, about 7.0 miles away, ranks healthier. In the round, the area also sits on the healthier half of the national range on at least seven of the ten good-life measures tracked here, from quiet and green space to nearby care, a combination reached by about one in twenty-five US ZIP codes.
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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 79%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 92%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 86%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 97%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 64%
8%
Disability
healthier than 79%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 89%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 59%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 91%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 96%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 86%
8%
Disability
healthier than 90%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 88%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 9%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 89%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 86%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 68%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 96%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 86%
8%
Disability
in the top 0.00%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 68%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 25%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 21.2; chronic-disease standing 78.7 — 58 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,159 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
28701
North Carolinashares a border
Score 51.06
Closest healthier
28757
North Carolinaabout 7.0 mi away
Score 65.09
Similar health profile
27511
North Carolina98% similar profile
Score 63.81
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 | 26.3% | 23.4–29.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.1% | 30.4–37.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.0% | 9.1–10.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.0% | 8.9–11.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.3% | 5.7–6.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.0% | 5.3–6.8 |
| Depression among adults | 24.2% | 20.8–27.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.7% | 8.4–11.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.0% | 31.1–39.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 28.5% | 22.7–34.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.1% | 2.8–3.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.0% | 6.5–9.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.6% | 6.4–8.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.5% | 74.9–80.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.3% | 76.0–82.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.3% | 86.8–89.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 73.1% | 69.0–76.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.6% | 67.6–73.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.1% | 73.8–85.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.6% | 12.9–18.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.9% | 8.4–11.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 17.4% | 14.4–20.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 26.4% | 22.0–31.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 14.4% | 12.5–16.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.4% | 12.7–16.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.9% | 9.6–12.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.6% | 11.0–14.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 28.2% | 24.4–32.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.5% | 6.8–8.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.6% | 5.8–7.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.6% | 10.1–13.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.9% | 2.6–3.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.9% | 3.5–4.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 18.6% | 15.6–21.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.1% | 7.7–10.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.9% | 5.7–8.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.3% | 6.2–8.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.8% | 5.0–6.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.4% | 24.9–34.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.9% | 4.2–5.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.0% (4.4–25.0%) n=793 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 13.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.5% (5.7–24.9%) n=794 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.4% (3.1–19.8%) n=798 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 60.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.8% (10.7–53.4%) n=798 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.1%) n=796 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.0–10.2%) n=793 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (76.2–96.3%) n=793 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 29.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 24.7% (14.1–36.5%) n=793 |
| Homeownership rate | 71.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (52.7–89.7%) n=793 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.5%) n=793 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 4.2% (0.0–12.9%) n=799 |
| Single-parent households | 59.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.8% (39.2–70.1%) n=790 |
| Population 65+ | 23.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.1–31.9%) n=799 |
| Median age | 43.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (33.3–55.7) n=797 |
| Median household income | $88,312 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,030 ($44,419–$97,111) n=749 |
| Median home value | $566,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $223,850 ($113,970–$452,990) n=758 |
| Median gross rent | $1,492 | $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 | 79.4 yr ± 0.98 | 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 0.98 years of 79.4, 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