ZIP code
29204
in Columbia, South CarolinaPopulation 18,159
47.19/ 100
Ranked #19,935 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 38%)
Ranked #204 of 417 South Carolina ZIPs (top 49%)
Ranked #29 of 47 Columbia, SC ZIPs (bottom 38%)
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.
Transit access
8.9 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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 ›Dental provider access
1.5 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental offices 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 ›Physician access
3.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ offices 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 ›Outpatient-care access
0.55 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics 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 ›Walkability
120 intersections/sq mi
in the top 7.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Households without a vehicle
14.9%
in the top 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›PFOA in drinking water
93.1%
in the top 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOA, one of the man-made “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 ›PFOS in drinking water
93.1%
in the top 7.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Short sleep
42.3%
in the top 8.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
35.1 per million
in the top 9.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 29204, one of several in Columbia, South Carolina, by its overall standing, sits in the bottom 38% nationally (19,935th) and the top 49% of South Carolina (204th).
The data points to real strain across a number of measures here: households without a vehicle lands in the top 7.4% nationally, PFOA in drinking water is in the top 7.4% nationally, and PFOS in drinking water resides in the top 7.5% nationally. Modeled short sleep rests in the top 8.3% nationally. On the brighter side, transit lies in the top 1.6% nationally, and dental providers sits in the top 2.5% nationally. Physicians settles in the top 3.0% nationally. Distance to an emergency room registers at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Outpatient stands in the top 6.4% nationally, and walkability lands in the top 7.3% nationally.
Held up against its neighbors, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, PFOA in drinking water is one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. 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. The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 29205, 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. 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 62%
13%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 44%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 43%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 44%
8%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 16%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Disability
healthier than 25%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 36%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 65%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 67%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 59%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 53%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 44%
8%
Disability
healthier than 44%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 32%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 13%
14%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 85%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 48%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 48%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 41%
11%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 33%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 35%
8%
Disability
healthier than 28%
7%
“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
2 of our published findings list 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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 73.9 ± 1.2 years. A median household income of $50,189 predicts 77.4 years — 3.5 years below.
Ranked #4,683 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 73.9 ± 1.2 years. The 44 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 77.5 years — 3.6 years below them.
Ranked #2,828 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
29201
South Carolinashares a border
Score 43.35
Closest healthier
29205
South Carolinashares a border
Score 57.52
Similar health profile
29801
South Carolina90% similar profile
Score 45.88
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 | 28.9% | 26.6–31.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 40.6% | 37.7–43.5 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.1% | 6.5–7.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.5% | 9.4–11.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.9% | 6.2–7.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.7% | 7.0–8.5 |
| Depression among adults | 22.9% | 20.3–25.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.8% | 14.3–17.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.6% | 33.8–39.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.5% | 32.5–40.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.6% | 4.3–5.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 18.8% | 15.9–21.5 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.6% | 10.9–14.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.5% | 76.4–80.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.7% | 79.2–84.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.6% | 82.7–86.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 73.3% | 69.6–76.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 59.0% | 55.9–61.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.4% | 71.6–82.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.9% | 12.7–17.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.0% | 11.5–14.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.5% | 22.7–28.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 42.3% | 38.2–46.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 23.6% | 21.4–25.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.6% | 15.9–19.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.7% | 13.2–16.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.6% | 14.9–18.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 35.0% | 31.9–38.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.2% | 5.6–6.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.2% | 10.2–12.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.9% | 16.3–19.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.8% | 5.3–6.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.9% | 7.2–8.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.9% | 22.8–29.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 23.8% | 21.1–26.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 18.4% | 16.3–20.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.5% | 16.3–20.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 13.0% | 11.6–14.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 35.3% | 31.5–39.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 13.6% | 12.1–15.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 23.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.5% (6.2–28.7%) n=410 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 13.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.1% (5.9–25.5%) n=412 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 11.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (3.4–21.1%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 38.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.1% (9.1–48.9%) n=417 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 8.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (0.2–11.1%) n=414 |
| Households without a vehicle | 14.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–13.6%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 84.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.1% (71.4–95.1%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 36.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.3% (12.8–35.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 58.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.3% (54.9–91.8%) n=410 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.6%) n=410 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.7% (0.0–9.0%) n=419 |
| Single-parent households | 41.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (37.6–69.9%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 20.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.6% (10.9–31.7%) n=419 |
| Median age | 35.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.4 yr (33.8–54.1) n=415 |
| Median household income | $50,189 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,990 ($40,800–$90,964) n=384 |
| Median home value | $199,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $177,400 ($88,260–$384,940) n=383 |
| Median gross rent | $1,031 | $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 | 73.9 yr ± 0.59 | 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 0.59 years of 73.9, 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