ZIP code
29403
in Charleston, South CarolinaPopulation 22,533
55.37/ 100
Ranked #9,013 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 28%)
Ranked #71 of 417 South Carolina ZIPs (top 17%)
Ranked #19 of 45 Charleston-North Charleston, SC ZIPs (top 42%)
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.
Binge drinking
23.7%
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›Outer-floodplain exposure
24.7%
in the top 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 0.2%-annual-chance flood band — the “500-year” zone, a lower but real 1-in-500 yearly chance.
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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
In this ZIP
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Superfund site — an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has listed for cleanup.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
67.2%
in the top 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
831 units
in the top 2.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
29.4%
in the bottom 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Transit access
6.5 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Homeownership rate
32.9%
in the bottom 3.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST3rdUS4thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
47.9%
in the top 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Cross-source signals
Combined exposures in this ZIP
More than one environmental exposure stands out in this ZIP. Each is established independently and shown on its own above; they are grouped here for context — not because one causes the other.
This area ranks among the highest 10% of US ZIP codes for both flood exposure and the share of households without a vehicle.
See the full flooding, evacuation & humid-heat analysis →
The read
ZIP 29403, one of several in Charleston, South Carolina ranks in the top 28% healthiest ZIPs nationally (9,013th) and the top 17% of South Carolina (71st).
A profile of give and take, with clear readings each way: subsidized affordable housing sits in the top 2.0% nationally, and modeled high cholesterol resides in the bottom 2.9% nationally. Transit stands in the top 3.1% nationally. On the other side, modeled binge drinking sits in the top 0.9% nationally, outer-floodplain exposure resides in the top 1.7% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site stands at the national minimum. Floodplain exposure sits in the top 1.9% nationally, modeled expected annual loss resides in the top 2.7% nationally, and homeownership stands in the bottom 3.7% nationally. Housing-cost burden sits in the top 4.0% nationally.
Against its neighbors, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Outer-floodplain exposure is land with a lower but real 1-in-500 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "500-year floodplain". The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 29401, 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 Charleston-North Charleston, SC metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 93%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 73%
16%
Disability
healthier than 71%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 44%
13%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 32%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 39%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 31%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 7%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 96%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 81%
16%
Disability
healthier than 86%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 49%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 22%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 31%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 24%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 9%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 91%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 61%
16%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 59%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 20%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 34%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 7%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 30%
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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 32.1; chronic-disease standing 92.8 (top 10%) — 61 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,485 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
29401
South Carolinashares a border
Score 61.78
Closest healthier
29407
South Carolinashares a border
Score 59.68
Similar health profile
70558
Louisiana96% similar profile
Score 57.75
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 | 19.2% | 17.4–21.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 27.9% | 25.6–30.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 4.9% | 4.5–5.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.7% | 8.6–10.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.2% | 3.8–4.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.1% | 4.5–5.7 |
| Depression among adults | 24.3% | 21.4–27.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.2% | 9.1–11.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 29.4% | 26.8–32.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 31.2% | 27.2–35.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.0% | 2.7–3.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 14.5% | 12.1–17.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.7% | 9.0–12.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.7% | 71.5–75.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.9% | 72.8–78.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 81.6% | 79.4–83.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 73.6% | 69.9–76.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 61.4% | 58.3–64.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.8% | 74.3–84.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 23.7% | 20.6–26.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.2% | 9.6–12.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.2% | 18.4–24.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.5% | 29.6–37.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.7% | 14.8–18.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.1% | 16.1–20.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.0% | 9.7–12.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.5% | 13.8–17.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.5% | 24.5–30.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.4% | 3.9–4.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.6% | 7.7–9.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.9–12.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–3.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.2% | 4.7–5.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.0% | 20.1–26.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.1% | 15.6–20.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 12.2% | 10.4–14.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.8% | 12.0–15.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.1% | 8.9–11.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.0% | 30.2–37.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.7–11.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 25.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.5% (6.2–28.7%) n=410 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.1% (5.9–25.5%) n=412 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (3.4–21.1%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 60.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.1% (9.1–48.9%) n=417 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (0.2–11.1%) n=414 |
| Households without a vehicle | 19.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–13.6%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 86.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.1% (71.4–95.1%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 47.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.3% (12.8–35.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 32.9% | 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 | 4.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.7% (0.0–9.0%) n=419 |
| Single-parent households | 41.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (37.6–69.9%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 10.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.6% (10.9–31.7%) n=419 |
| Median age | 30.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.4 yr (33.8–54.1) n=415 |
| Median household income | $66,944 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,990 ($40,800–$90,964) n=384 |
| Median home value | $674,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $177,400 ($88,260–$384,940) n=383 |
| Median gross rent | $1,798 | $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