ZIP code
29107
in Neeses, South CarolinaPopulation 2,646
39.78/ 100
Ranked #26,904 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 16%)
Ranked #347 of 417 South Carolina ZIPs (bottom 17%)
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
28.3 mi
in the top 2.2% 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 ›Fatal road crashes
56.7 per 100,000 residents per year
in the top 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Self-care disability
6.5%
in the top 8.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST75thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
12.4%
in the top 9.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Stroke
5.4%
in the top 8.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST69thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
26%
in the top 9.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST73rdUS90thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Pharmacy access
0.35 per 1,000 residents
in the top 10.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The number of pharmacies 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 ›Mammography
70.3%
in the bottom 15% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST2ndUS15thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
1.8%
in the bottom 17% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS17thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›The read
Neeses, South Carolina (ZIP 29107) ranks in the bottom 16% nationally (26,904th) and the bottom 17% of South Carolina (347th).
A balanced set of signals defines this area, not any single one: pharmacy is in the top 10.3% nationally. Distance to a community health center registers at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. By contrast, distance to an emergency room lies in the top 2.2% nationally, fatal road crashes is in the top 2.8% nationally, and modeled self-care disability registers in the top 8.5% nationally. Modeled independent living disability lies in the top 9.3% nationally, stroke is in the top 8.9% nationally, and food insecurity registers in the top 9.9% nationally. Modeled diabetes lies in the top 10.6% nationally, and mobility disability is in the top 12.5% nationally.
For context, distance to a community health center is a federally funded (HRSA) community health center serving everyone regardless of ability to pay. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 29038, just across the boundary.
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 87%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 15%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 13%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 27%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 23%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 20%
8%
Disability
healthier than 11%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 39%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 38%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 79%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 76%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 29%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 27%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 13%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 27%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 9%
8%
Disability
healthier than 18%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 25%
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 87.6; chronic-disease standing 15.5 — 72 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #944 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
29038
South Carolinashares a border
Score 43.37
Closest healthier
29113
South Carolinashares a border
Score 40.36
Similar health profile
28343
North Carolina99% similar profile
Score 33.17
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 | 33.5% | 30.5–36.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 44.2% | 40.6–47.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.6% | 7.8–9.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.8% | 9.5–12.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.0% | 8.1–10.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.3% | 10.0–12.7 |
| Depression among adults | 25.2% | 21.9–28.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 17.3% | 15.4–19.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 40.6% | 36.9–44.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 40.0% | 34.3–45.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–5.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 20.0% | 16.8–23.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 14.9% | 12.7–17.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 81.4% | 79.0–83.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.3% | 78.2–84.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.3% | 82.3–86.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.6% | 58.9–68.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 54.3% | 50.9–57.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.3% | 63.2–77.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.7% | 12.2–17.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 19.1% | 16.7–21.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 33.2% | 29.1–37.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.6% | 31.7–42.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 27.6% | 24.5–30.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.1% | 17.2–21.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.8% | 15.8–19.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.7% | 16.7–20.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 39.5% | 35.4–43.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.8% | 7.9–9.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.4% | 11.0–13.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 21.2% | 18.9–23.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.8–7.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.2% | 7.4–9.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 26.4% | 23.1–30.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 26.0% | 22.7–29.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 17.9% | 15.3–20.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.2% | 14.9–19.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 12.1% | 10.6–13.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.7% | 27.6–36.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 12.0% | 10.5–13.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 12.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.5% (6.2–28.7%) n=410 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.1% (5.9–25.5%) n=412 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 17.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (3.4–21.1%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 14.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.1% (9.1–48.9%) n=417 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (0.2–11.1%) n=414 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–13.6%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 80.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.1% (71.4–95.1%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 19.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.3% (12.8–35.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 67.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.3% (54.9–91.8%) n=410 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.6%) n=410 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.7% (0.0–9.0%) n=419 |
| Single-parent households | 51.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (37.6–69.9%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 18.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.6% (10.9–31.7%) n=419 |
| Median age | 42.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.4 yr (33.8–54.1) n=415 |
| Median household income | $47,399 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,990 ($40,800–$90,964) n=384 |
| Median home value | $90,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $177,400 ($88,260–$384,940) n=383 |
| Median gross rent | $876 | $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 | 73.2 yr ± 1.24 | 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 1.24 years of 73.2, 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