ZIP code
29044
in Eastover, South CarolinaPopulation 4,799
44.85/ 100
Ranked #22,580 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 30%)
Ranked #251 of 417 South Carolina ZIPs (bottom 40%)
Ranked #33 of 47 Columbia, SC ZIPs (bottom 30%)
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.
Fatal road crashes
72.9 per 100,000 residents per year
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Diabetes
19.7%
in the top 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST81stUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
43.9%
in the top 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
47.9%
in the top 6.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Stroke
5.6%
in the top 6.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST76thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities 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 ›Colon-cancer screening
73.7%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Households without a vehicle
13.3%
in the top 9.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
40.2%
in the top 9.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Poverty rate
26%
in the top 9.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›The read
Eastover, South Carolina (ZIP 29044), on the composite measure, lands in the bottom 30% nationally (22,580th) and the bottom 40% of South Carolina (251st).
Where the data leans one way, another reading answers it: elder services is in the top 7.1% nationally, and modeled colon screening rests in the top 5.5% nationally. On the other hand, fatal road crashes sits in the top 1.2% nationally, modeled diabetes registers in the top 4.2% nationally, and modeled short sleep lands in the top 4.7% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure resides in the top 6.1% nationally, and stroke lies in the top 6.9% nationally. Households without a vehicle settles in the top 9.1% nationally, and housing-cost burden stands in the top 9.8% nationally. Poverty is in the top 9.8% nationally.
A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 29062, just across the boundary. Modeled high blood pressure is in the top 6.1% nationally.
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 Columbia, SC metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 84%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 66%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 70%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 52%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 16%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 13%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 31%
11%
Disability
healthier than 20%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 17%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 84%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 75%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 68%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 32%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 27%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 35%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 37%
11%
Disability
healthier than 37%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 23%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 74%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 65%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 67%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 50%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 22%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 26%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 22%
11%
Disability
healthier than 24%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 20%
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
29052
South Carolinashares a border
Score 43.76
Closest healthier
29062
South Carolinashares a border
Score 52.79
Similar health profile
36043
Alabama97% similar profile
Score 44.05
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 | 34.7% | 31.9–37.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 47.9% | 44.7–51.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.0% | 7.3–8.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.4% | 9.3–11.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.5% | 7.7–9.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.1% | 8.1–10.3 |
| Depression among adults | 21.1% | 18.6–24.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 19.7% | 17.6–22.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.1% | 37.9–44.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.6% | 35.2–44.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.6% | 5.1–6.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 18.0% | 15.1–21.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.8% | 10.8–14.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 82.6% | 80.4–84.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 83.6% | 81.2–85.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.2% | 86.8–89.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 73.7% | 69.9–77.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 58.3% | 55.0–61.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.7% | 74.3–84.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.4% | 11.4–15.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.0% | 12.9–17.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 28.5% | 24.9–32.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 43.9% | 39.7–47.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 25.9% | 23.1–28.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.5% | 14.7–18.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.5% | 14.7–18.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.5% | 13.8–17.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 37.1% | 33.5–40.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.7–12.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 21.5% | 19.1–24.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.7–7.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.9% | 7.1–8.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 27.8% | 24.6–31.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 22.8% | 19.7–26.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 16.3% | 13.9–18.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.4% | 16.0–20.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.4% | 10.1–12.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.3% | 30.6–38.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 12.8% | 11.2–14.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 26.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.5% (6.2–28.7%) n=410 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 21.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.1% (5.9–25.5%) n=412 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 15.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (3.4–21.1%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 14.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.1% (9.1–48.9%) n=417 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (0.2–11.1%) n=414 |
| Households without a vehicle | 13.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–13.6%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 85.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.1% (71.4–95.1%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 40.2% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.3% (12.8–35.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 82.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.3% (54.9–91.8%) n=410 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.6%) n=410 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.7% (0.0–9.0%) n=419 |
| Single-parent households | 53.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (37.6–69.9%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 22.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.6% (10.9–31.7%) n=419 |
| Median age | 34.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.4 yr (33.8–54.1) n=415 |
| Median household income | $57,297 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,990 ($40,800–$90,964) n=384 |
| Median home value | $135,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $177,400 ($88,260–$384,940) n=383 |
| Median gross rent | $982 | $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 unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
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