ZIP code
29590
in Salters, South CarolinaPopulation 3,480
40.23/ 100
Ranked #26,600 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 17%)
Ranked #340 of 417 South Carolina ZIPs (bottom 18%)
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.
Uninsured (under 65)
21.8%
in the top 3.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
0.94%
in the bottom 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›Obesity
48.6%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
20.1%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
27.7%
in the top 2.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Self-care disability
7.3%
in the top 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
19.4%
in the top 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
36.3%
in the top 3.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
49.8%
in the top 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
31.8%
in the top 5.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Cross-source signals
Health need and barriers to care documented here
On our reading, this ZIP code carries the overlap at its acute level: acute means at least three of the six health-need readings and at least three of the six access barriers apply to the same place.
These are two separate readings of public data that both apply to this place — never a claim that one causes the other, never a severity score, and never a statement about any person who lives here.
Health need documented here
- People without health insurance
- People living in poverty
- Food insecurity
- Housing insecurity
- Adults reporting fair or poor health
- Chronic conditions
Barriers to reaching care
- Thin local supply of doctors
- Thin local supply of pharmacies
- Households with no vehicle
A reading appears below only where this ZIP code is among the most-affected 10% of US ZIP codes on it — one national bar, the same for every ZIP in the country.
See the full care-deserts analysis →The read
Overall, Salters, South Carolina (ZIP 29590) lands in the bottom 17% nationally (26,600th) and the bottom 18% of South Carolina (340th).
What defines this place in the numbers is worth naming first: modeled uninsured rests in the top 3.5% nationally, and obesity stands in the top 1.2% nationally. Modeled diabetes lies in the top 3.7% nationally, and housing insecurity lands in the top 2.6% nationally. Modeled self-care disability sits in the top 4.7% nationally, utility shutoff is in the top 2.9% nationally, and food insecurity settles in the top 3.1% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure resides in the top 3.6% nationally, and fair or poor health registers in the top 5.6% nationally. More encouragingly, modeled arsenic rests in the bottom 1.2% nationally.
A note on the terms: arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 29056, just across the boundary, ranks better overall. The ZIP also shows documented health need overlapping with barriers to reaching care, sitting in the most-affected 10% of US ZIP codes on several need measures and several access barriers.
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 96%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 72%
8%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 55%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 24%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 2%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 20%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 5%
11%
Disability
healthier than 13%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 37%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 96%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 82%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 68%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 44%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 51%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 1%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 8%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 2%
11%
Disability
healthier than 23%
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
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 95.8 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 23.6 — 72 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #937 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
29056
South Carolinashares a border
Score 49.75
Closest healthier
29510
South Carolinashares a border
Score 43.20
Similar health profile
42047
Kentucky97% similar profile
Score 41.97
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 | 26.4% | 23.5–29.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 49.8% | 45.6–53.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.1% | 4.7–5.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.5% | 6.7–8.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.8% | 7.6–9.9 |
| Depression among adults | 17.6% | 14.9–20.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 20.1% | 17.8–22.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.9% | 33.0–40.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 48.6% | 41.8–55.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.4% | 4.8–6.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 21.2% | 17.5–25.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 21.8% | 18.6–25.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.9% | 76.1–81.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.6% | 76.2–82.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.1% | 80.8–85.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 61.2% | 56.2–65.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 46.0% | 42.3–49.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 82.3% | 76.4–87.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.9% | 11.4–16.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 22.0% | 19.0–25.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 36.1% | 31.3–41.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 42.9% | 36.8–48.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 31.8% | 28.0–35.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.2% | 16.1–20.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.5% | 14.6–18.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.2% | 16.1–20.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 40.4% | 35.8–45.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.7–7.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.6% | 10.2–13.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 20.3% | 17.7–23.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.4–8.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 9.3% | 8.3–10.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 34.8% | 30.5–39.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 36.3% | 31.8–40.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 25.7% | 22.1–29.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 27.7% | 24.2–31.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 16.0% | 14.0–18.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.9% | 31.8–42.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 19.4% | 17.0–21.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 34.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.5% (6.2–28.7%) n=410 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 15.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.1% (5.9–25.5%) n=412 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 19.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (3.4–21.1%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 13.6% | 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 | 15.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–13.6%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 81.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.1% (71.4–95.1%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 34.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.3% (12.8–35.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 88.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.3% (54.9–91.8%) n=410 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 7.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.6%) n=410 |
| Foreign-born population | 5.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.7% (0.0–9.0%) n=419 |
| Single-parent households | 34.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (37.6–69.9%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 10.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.6% (10.9–31.7%) n=419 |
| Median age | 41.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.4 yr (33.8–54.1) n=415 |
| Median household income | $31,115 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,990 ($40,800–$90,964) n=384 |
| Median home value | $74,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $177,400 ($88,260–$384,940) n=383 |
| Median gross rent | $674 | $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