ZIP code
29133
in Rowesville, South CarolinaPopulation 1,262
41.55/ 100
Ranked #25,617 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 20%)
Ranked #315 of 417 South Carolina ZIPs (bottom 24%)
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.
Fiber broadband
100%
at the national maximum
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Child-care access
1.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to an emergency room
26 mi
in the top 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare-certified hospital with an emergency room.
Full methodology ›Civic-institution access
1.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Unemployment rate
12.9%
in the top 5.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
18.1%
in the top 7.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST68thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
5.3%
in the top 6.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Median household income
$36,987
in the bottom 4.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST7thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
11.9%
in the bottom 12.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS12thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Walkability
3.3 intersections/sq mi
in the bottom 19% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST9thUS19thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite measure, Rowesville, South Carolina (ZIP 29133) sits in the bottom 20% nationally (25,617th) and the bottom 24% of South Carolina (315th).
The main burdens in the data show plainly and lead the picture: distance to an emergency room stands in the top 2.7% nationally, unemployment is in the top 5.3% nationally, and modeled diabetes rests in the top 7.8% nationally. Modeled energy burden sits in the top 6.7% nationally, floodplain exposure registers in the top 10.3% nationally, and household income lands in the bottom 4.2% nationally. Modeled stroke resides in the top 10.1% nationally. More positively, fiber broadband lies at the national maximum, and childcare settles in the top 1.9% nationally. Civic stands in the top 3.5% nationally.
In plain language, energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. Floodplain exposure is land with about a 1-in-100 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "100-year floodplain". ZIP 29018, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 77%
14%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 48%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 19%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 6%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 39%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 29%
11%
Disability
healthier than 20%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 13%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 60%
14%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 51%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 37%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 13%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 24%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 36%
11%
Disability
healthier than 38%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 18%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 29%
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 77.0; chronic-disease standing 19.2 — 58 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #1,899 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
29018
South Carolinashares a border
Score 41.92
Closest healthier
29038
South Carolinashares a border
Score 43.37
Similar health profile
31716
Georgia98% similar profile
Score 43.47
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 | 32.4% | 29.4–35.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 45.8% | 42.2–49.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.7% | 7.0–8.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.6% | 9.4–11.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.1% | 7.3–9.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.4% | 8.3–10.5 |
| Depression among adults | 22.2% | 19.3–25.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 18.1% | 16.1–20.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 40.2% | 36.4–43.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 40.7% | 35.1–46.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.3% | 4.9–5.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 21.1% | 17.9–24.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 13.9% | 11.7–16.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 82.5% | 80.1–84.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 82.5% | 79.4–85.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.6% | 84.8–88.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 62.2% | 57.7–66.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 54.2% | 50.8–57.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.9% | 66.1–79.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.5% | 11.9–17.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.0% | 14.7–19.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 31.9% | 27.8–36.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.2% | 33.1–43.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 26.0% | 23.1–29.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.6% | 15.7–19.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.4% | 14.5–18.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.7% | 14.8–18.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 36.9% | 32.9–40.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.9% | 9.7–12.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 20.2% | 18.0–22.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.6–6.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.7% | 7.0–8.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 28.4% | 25.0–32.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 24.9% | 21.9–28.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 16.0% | 13.8–18.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.6% | 15.4–19.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.4% | 10.0–12.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.8% | 27.8–36.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 11.9% | 10.4–13.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 15.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.5% (6.2–28.7%) n=410 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 18.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.1% (5.9–25.5%) n=412 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 19.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (3.4–21.1%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 11.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.1% (9.1–48.9%) n=417 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 12.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (0.2–11.1%) n=414 |
| Households without a vehicle | 10.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–13.6%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 77.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.1% (71.4–95.1%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 11.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.3% (12.8–35.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 68.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.3% (54.9–91.8%) n=410 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.6%) n=410 |
| Foreign-born population | 2.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.7% (0.0–9.0%) n=419 |
| Single-parent households | 38.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (37.6–69.9%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 15.1% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.6% (10.9–31.7%) n=419 |
| Median age | 37.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.4 yr (33.8–54.1) n=415 |
| Median household income | $36,987 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,990 ($40,800–$90,964) n=384 |
| Median home value | $136,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $177,400 ($88,260–$384,940) n=383 |
| Median gross rent | $722 | $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