ZIP code
29676
in Salem, South CarolinaPopulation 6,016
57.59/ 100
Ranked #6,728 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 21%)
Ranked #55 of 417 South Carolina ZIPs (top 13.2%)
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.
Loneliness
25.3%
in the bottom 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
0.90%
in the bottom 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS1stDefinition & 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 ›High cholesterol
47.9%
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
6.1%
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
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 ›Housing insecurity
6.2%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
75.9%
in the top 1.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
4.3%
in the bottom 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
4.8%
in the bottom 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
94.6%
in the top 9.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
10.7%
in the bottom 8.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›The read
By its overall health score, Salem, South Carolina (ZIP 29676) lands in the top 21% healthiest ZIPs nationally (6,728th) and the top 13.2% of South Carolina (55th).
Neither strongly one way nor the other, the measures sit mixed: modeled loneliness lands in the bottom 0.6% nationally, and arsenic registers in the bottom 0.9% nationally. Modeled pfas sits in the bottom 2.2% nationally, and housing insecurity rests in the bottom 3.3% nationally. Modeled colon screening is in the top 1.9% nationally, utility shutoff stands in the bottom 5.7% nationally, and transportation settles in the bottom 5.9% nationally. Homeownership lies in the top 9.1% nationally, and modeled cognitive disability resides in the bottom 8.4% nationally. Against that, modeled high cholesterol lands in the top 0.9% nationally.
To translate a couple of terms, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Pfas is the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down; here a modeled estimate of the chance a private well contains them. Overall, the nearest healthier neighbor is ZIP 28774, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 92%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 98%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 92%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 90%
8%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 58%
14%
Disability
healthier than 54%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 17%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 31%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 38%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 97%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 97%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 96%
8%
Disability
healthier than 78%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 41%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 53%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 32%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 23%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
28712
North Carolinashares a border
Score 57.14
Closest healthier
28774
North Carolinashares a border
Score 65.09
Similar health profile
28467
North Carolina98% similar profile
Score 59.68
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 | 39.9% | 36.0–43.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 43.8% | 39.4–48.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 15.6% | 14.1–17.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.0% | 7.9–10.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.7% | 8.6–11.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.2% | 7.7–11.1 |
| Depression among adults | 21.8% | 18.6–25.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.4% | 13.3–17.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 47.9% | 43.5–52.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 33.4% | 27.5–39.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.7% | 4.1–5.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.7% | 7.2–10.5 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.4% | 6.8–10.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 86.8% | 84.4–89.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 86.2% | 83.8–88.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 92.7% | 91.6–93.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 75.9% | 71.8–79.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.3% | 67.3–73.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.7% | 72.1–84.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.0% | 10.7–15.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.6% | 8.7–12.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.9% | 19.7–28.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.7% | 26.0–36.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 18.6% | 15.7–21.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 11.7% | 10.2–13.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.7% | 12.7–16.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 10.7% | 9.1–12.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.0% | 26.6–35.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.2% | 9.0–11.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.5% | 6.4–8.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 16.8% | 14.2–19.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.9% | 3.4–4.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.8% | 4.1–5.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 17.4% | 14.6–20.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.5% | 7.7–11.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 5.5% | 4.4–6.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.2% | 5.2–7.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.8% | 4.1–5.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 25.3% | 21.4–29.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.3% | 3.6–5.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.5% (6.2–28.7%) n=410 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.1% (5.9–25.5%) n=412 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (3.4–21.1%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 50.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.1% (9.1–48.9%) n=417 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (0.2–11.1%) n=414 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–13.6%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 88.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.1% (71.4–95.1%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 17.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.3% (12.8–35.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 94.6% | 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 | 1.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.7% (0.0–9.0%) n=419 |
| Single-parent households | 84.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (37.6–69.9%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 47.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.6% (10.9–31.7%) n=419 |
| Median age | 64.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.4 yr (33.8–54.1) n=415 |
| Median household income | $92,798 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,990 ($40,800–$90,964) n=384 |
| Median home value | $416,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $177,400 ($88,260–$384,940) n=383 |
| Median gross rent | $940 | $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 | 78.3 yr ± 1.35 | 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 1.35 years of 78.3, 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