ZIP code
29845
in Plum Branch, South CarolinaPopulation 837
43.00/ 100
Ranked #24,374 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 24%)
Ranked #287 of 417 South Carolina ZIPs (bottom 31%)
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.
Diabetes
22.2%
in the top 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Stroke
6.5%
in the top 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
51.4%
in the top 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Child-care access
0.9 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›Mobility disability
23.9%
in the top 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Self-care disability
7.0%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Civic-institution access
0.9 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations 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 ›High cholesterol
45.4%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Fiber broadband
97.6%
in the top 7.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST87thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
12.0%
in the bottom 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS7thDefinition & 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 ›The read
By the composite health measure, Plum Branch, South Carolina (ZIP 29845) ranks in the bottom 24% nationally (24,374th) and the bottom 31% of South Carolina (287th).
Where the load on this area runs deepest, the data leads: modeled diabetes rests in the top 1.6% nationally, and stroke stands in the top 2.3% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure lies in the top 2.3% nationally, and mobility disability lands in the top 5.1% nationally. Modeled self-care disability sits in the top 5.9% nationally, and high cholesterol is in the top 3.7% nationally. More encouragingly, childcare settles in the top 3.0% nationally, civic resides in the top 5.0% nationally, and fiber broadband registers in the top 7.4% nationally. Modeled binge drinking rests in the bottom 6.8% nationally.
Close by, ZIP 29835, just across the boundary, ranks healthier overall. Childcare rests in the top 3.0% nationally.
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 89%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 85%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 76%
8%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 45%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 5%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 23%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 35%
11%
Disability
healthier than 11%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 20%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 81%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 85%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 85%
8%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 44%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 6%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 39%
16%
Disability
healthier than 17%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 27%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 36%
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
29824
South Carolinashares a border
Score 41.39
Closest healthier
29835
South Carolinashares a border
Score 48.93
Similar health profile
36071
Alabama99% similar profile
Score 44.09
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 | 37.2% | 33.3–41.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 51.4% | 47.0–55.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.5% | 8.6–10.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.3% | 9.2–11.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.3% | 9.8–12.8 |
| Depression among adults | 19.8% | 16.7–23.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 22.2% | 19.5–24.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 45.4% | 40.6–50.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 40.6% | 32.8–48.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 6.5% | 5.9–7.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 20.4% | 17.0–24.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 13.1% | 10.7–15.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 86.0% | 83.8–87.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 84.2% | 81.3–86.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.7% | 87.2–90.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 71.3% | 66.4–75.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 57.2% | 53.6–60.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.4% | 72.4–85.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.0% | 9.7–14.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.6% | 14.9–20.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 33.4% | 28.3–38.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.0% | 32.8–45.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 27.9% | 24.4–31.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.1% | 14.1–18.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.5% | 15.4–19.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.9% | 13.9–17.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 39.5% | 34.6–44.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.1% | 8.1–10.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.6% | 10.1–13.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 23.9% | 20.9–26.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.2–7.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.6% | 7.6–9.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 27.2% | 23.5–31.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 24.9% | 21.2–28.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 17.4% | 14.7–20.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.2% | 14.9–19.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.2% | 9.7–12.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.6% | 26.9–36.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 12.3% | 10.7–14.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | SC median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 17.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.5% (6.2–28.7%) n=410 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 13.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.1% (5.9–25.5%) n=412 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (3.4–21.1%) n=417 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 21.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.1% (9.1–48.9%) n=417 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (0.2–11.1%) n=414 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–13.6%) n=410 |
| Broadband subscription | 81.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.1% (71.4–95.1%) n=410 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 16.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.3% (12.8–35.0%) n=410 |
| Homeownership rate | 89.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.3% (54.9–91.8%) n=410 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–4.6%) n=410 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.7% (0.0–9.0%) n=419 |
| Single-parent households | 72.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (37.6–69.9%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 41.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.6% (10.9–31.7%) n=419 |
| Median age | 60.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.4 yr (33.8–54.1) n=415 |
| Median household income | $50,673 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,990 ($40,800–$90,964) n=384 |
| Median home value | $110,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $177,400 ($88,260–$384,940) n=383 |
| Median gross rent | $850 | $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