ZIP code
29492
in Charleston, South CarolinaPopulation 20,436
65.58/ 100
Ranked #1,779 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 5.6%)
Ranked #10 of 417 South Carolina ZIPs (top 2.4%)
Ranked #7 of 45 Charleston-North Charleston, SC ZIPs (top 16%)
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.
Lack of transportation
4.2%
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
59%
in the top 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Loneliness
27%
in the bottom 3.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
6.4%
in the bottom 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
7.2%
in the bottom 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
4.2%
in the bottom 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
11.3%
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Recreation access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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 ›Independent-living disability
4.9%
in the bottom 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & 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 ›Cognitive disability
9.7%
in the bottom 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 29492, one of several in Charleston, South Carolina, by its composite score, sits in the top 5.6% healthiest ZIPs nationally (1,779th) and the top 2.4% of South Carolina (10th).
The measures fall on both sides for this area, fairly evenly: modeled transportation lies in the bottom 2.2% nationally, and loneliness rests in the bottom 3.1% nationally. Modeled housing insecurity resides in the bottom 4.0% nationally, and food insecurity is in the bottom 4.3% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff lands in the bottom 5.0% nationally, modeled fair or poor health stands in the bottom 2.2% nationally, and recreation registers in the top 5.1% nationally. Modeled independent living disability settles in the bottom 2.3% nationally, and cognitive disability sits in the bottom 4.0% nationally. Pulling the other way, floodplain exposure lies in the top 2.7% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, floodplain exposure is land with about a 1-in-100 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "100-year floodplain". For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 29464, just across the boundary. The area further sits on the healthier half of the national range on at least seven of the ten good-life measures tracked here, from quiet and green space to nearby care, a combination reached by about one in twenty-five US ZIP codes.
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 91%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 94%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 91%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 81%
8%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 71%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 32%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 3%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 95%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.8%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 94%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 96%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 90%
8%
Disability
healthier than 99%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 69%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 22%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 4%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 84%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 82%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 91%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 70%
8%
Disability
healthier than 95%
7%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 11%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 2%
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
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.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 81.7 ± 1.9 years. The 44 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 77.3 years — 4.4 years above them.
Ranked #238 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 31.8; chronic-disease standing 90.7 (top 10%) — 59 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,299 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
29405
South Carolinashares a border
Score 42.60
Closest healthier
29464
South Carolinashares a border
Score 66.94
Similar health profile
76054
Texas99% similar profile
Score 59.23
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 | 23.7% | 21.0–26.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.1% | 27.9–34.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.8% | 8.0–9.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.7% | 7.6–9.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.4% | 3.9–5.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.1% | 3.5–4.7 |
| Depression among adults | 22.2% | 19.2–25.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.3% | 8.1–10.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.5% | 32.9–40.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 32.0% | 27.1–37.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.3% | 2.1–2.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 5.3% | 4.3–6.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.2% | 5.1–7.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.2% | 75.4–81.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.5% | 77.6–83.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.8% | 88.4–91.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 74.0% | 70.3–77.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 73.3% | 70.7–75.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 82.0% | 76.7–86.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.8% | 15.0–20.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 7.7% | 6.3–9.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 16.5% | 13.9–19.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.0% | 27.9–36.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 11.3% | 9.7–13.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.5% | 11.9–15.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.8% | 8.6–11.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 9.7% | 8.5–11.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 22.8% | 19.9–26.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.2% | 4.6–5.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.3–5.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.1% | 7.8–10.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.1% | 1.9–2.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.8% | 2.5–3.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 17.6% | 15.0–20.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.2% | 6.0–8.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 3.1% | 2.5–3.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.4% | 5.3–7.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.2% | 3.6–4.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 27.0% | 23.1–30.6 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.2% | 3.6–4.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 6.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.5% (6.2–28.7%) n=410 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.1% (5.9–25.5%) n=412 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 1.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (3.4–21.1%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 65.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.1% (9.1–48.9%) n=417 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (0.2–11.1%) n=414 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–13.6%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 88.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.1% (71.4–95.1%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 38.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.3% (12.8–35.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 59.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.3% (54.9–91.8%) n=410 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.7% | 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 | 53.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (37.6–69.9%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 15.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.6% (10.9–31.7%) n=419 |
| Median age | 39.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.4 yr (33.8–54.1) n=415 |
| Median household income | $110,509 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,990 ($40,800–$90,964) n=384 |
| Median home value | $791,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $177,400 ($88,260–$384,940) n=383 |
| Median gross rent | $2,043 | $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 | 81.7 yr ± 0.99 | 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 0.99 years of 81.7, 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