ZIP code
29039
in Cordova, South CarolinaPopulation 2,941
43.17/ 100
Ranked #24,218 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 24%)
Ranked #283 of 417 South Carolina ZIPs (bottom 32%)
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.
Distance to an emergency room
32.6 mi
in the top 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare-certified hospital with an emergency room.
Full methodology ›PFOS in drinking water
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOS, one of the most common “forever chemicals,” was detected in EPA testing.
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 ›PFAS in drinking water
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFAS — man-made “forever chemicals” that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down — were detected in EPA testing.
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 ›Tooth loss
23.3%
in the top 9.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Unemployment rate
0.18%
in the bottom 14.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST10thUS15thDefinition & source ›
The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
0.59%
in the bottom 17% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS17thDefinition & 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 ›Mammography
71.1%
in the bottom 20% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST4thUS20thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
2.0%
in the bottom 26% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS26thDefinition & 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 ›The read
Overall, Cordova, South Carolina (ZIP 29039) lands in the bottom 24% nationally (24,218th) and the bottom 32% of South Carolina (283rd).
A number of measures mark where this area is under strain: distance to an emergency room settles in the top 1.6% nationally, and PFOS in drinking water resides at the national maximum. PFAS in drinking water registers at the national maximum, and modeled tooth loss rests in the top 9.9% nationally. Modeled food insecurity stands in the top 10.3% nationally, home broadband subscription lies in the bottom 11.1% nationally, and modeled housing insecurity lands in the top 11.6% nationally. Poverty sits in the top 11.9% nationally, modeled utility shutoff is in the top 12.3% nationally, and modeled humid heat settles in the top 12.5% nationally.
A note on the terms: PFOS in drinking water is a common one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. PFAS in drinking water is the family of man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. Humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 29038, just across the boundary, ranks better 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
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 70%
14%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 43%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 42%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 24%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 15%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 34%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 30%
11%
Disability
healthier than 23%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 20%
5%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 44%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 52%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 42%
8%
Disability
healthier than 41%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 31%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 19%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 37%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 29%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 31%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
29038
South Carolinashares a border
Score 43.37
Closest healthier
29118
South Carolinaabout 2.5 mi away
Score 50.76
Similar health profile
29546
South Carolina99% similar profile
Score 29.15
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 | 31.3% | 28.3–34.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 44.2% | 40.5–47.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.6% | 6.9–8.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.6% | 9.3–11.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.7% | 6.9–8.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.1% | 7.8–10.5 |
| Depression among adults | 22.7% | 19.5–25.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 17.0% | 15.0–19.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.1% | 35.4–42.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 40.8% | 35.2–46.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 23.3% | 19.7–27.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 14.4% | 12.0–17.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 81.3% | 79.0–83.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 82.1% | 79.1–84.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.9% | 83.8–87.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 64.6% | 60.0–69.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 54.4% | 50.8–57.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.1% | 63.9–77.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.5% | 12.0–17.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.6% | 14.1–19.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 31.5% | 27.3–36.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.5% | 33.5–43.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 25.4% | 22.2–28.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.9% | 15.9–20.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.9% | 14.0–18.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.8% | 14.7–19.0 |
| Any disability among adults | 36.2% | 32.0–40.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.2% | 6.4–8.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.9% | 9.5–12.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 19.2% | 16.7–21.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.8% | 5.1–6.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.5% | 6.6–8.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 27.5% | 23.9–31.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 25.7% | 22.0–29.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 17.1% | 14.2–20.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.4% | 15.8–21.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.8% | 10.2–13.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.7% | 27.6–35.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 12.6% | 10.9–14.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 24.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.5% (6.2–28.7%) n=410 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 11.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.1% (5.9–25.5%) n=412 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 11.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (3.4–21.1%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 13.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.1% (9.1–48.9%) n=417 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (0.2–11.1%) n=414 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–13.6%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 76.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.1% (71.4–95.1%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 16.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.3% (12.8–35.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 83.3% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.3% (54.9–91.8%) n=410 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.6%) n=410 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.7% (0.0–9.0%) n=419 |
| Single-parent households | 52.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (37.6–69.9%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 26.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.6% (10.9–31.7%) n=419 |
| Median age | 56.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.4 yr (33.8–54.1) n=415 |
| Median household income | $53,382 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,990 ($40,800–$90,964) n=384 |
| Median home value | $53,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $177,400 ($88,260–$384,940) n=383 |
| Median gross rent | $604 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $950 ($678–$1,545) n=343 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 77.3 yr ± 2.62 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 76.3 yr (73.2–79.9) n=389 |
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 2.62 years of 77.3, 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