ZIP code
30215
in Fayetteville, GeorgiaPopulation 40,476
62.05/ 100
Ranked #3,502 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 11.0%)
Ranked #56 of 711 Georgia ZIPs (top 7.9%)
Ranked #45 of 206 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA ZIPs (top 22%)
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.
Lithium in drinking water
9.2 µg/L
in the bottom 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
1.3%
in the bottom 8.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST41stUS8thDefinition & 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 ›Energy-cost burden
1.6%
in the bottom 6.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 10.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS90thDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
53.2%
in the top 11.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS89thDefinition & 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 ›Median household income
$118,436
in the top 10.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
11.5%
in the bottom 13.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS14thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Mammography
79.6%
in the top 13.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS86thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
0.81%
in the bottom 20% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS20thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›Poverty rate
5.3%
in the bottom 20% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS20thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite health measure, ZIP 30215, one of several in Fayetteville, Georgia ranks in the top 11.0% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,502nd) and the top 7.9% of Georgia (56th).
The signals balance out across the profile, strengths against concerns: lithium in drinking water resides in the bottom 1.6% nationally, and modeled arsenic registers in the bottom 8.2% nationally. Modeled energy burden rests in the bottom 6.7% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise stands at the national minimum, shared with about 22% of ZIPs. Distance to an emergency room lies in the bottom 11.2% nationally, household income lands in the top 10.1% nationally, and home broadband subscription sits in the top 13.5% nationally. Modeled cognitive disability is in the bottom 13.6% nationally. Set against that, modeled disaster risk settles in the top 10.3% nationally, and pfas resides in the top 11.4% nationally.
Read against the ZIPs closest to it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To spell things out, lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Close by, ZIP 30269, just across the boundary, ranks healthier overall.
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 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA 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 72%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 84%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 87%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 87%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 89%
8%
Disability
healthier than 81%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 62%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 54%
14%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 31%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 79%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 90%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 97%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 94%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 92%
8%
Disability
healthier than 88%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 40%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 48%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 54%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 76%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 79%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 96%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 86%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 80%
8%
Disability
healthier than 71%
7%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 52%
21%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 8%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 40%
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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 79.1 ± 1.1 years. A median household income of $118,436 predicts 80.7 years — 1.6 years below.
Ranked #1,999 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 79.1 ± 1.1 years. The 47 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 76.3 years — 2.9 years above them.
Ranked #905 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
30205
Georgiashares a border
Score 59.22
Closest healthier
30269
Georgiashares a border
Score 67.13
Similar health profile
08730
New Jersey99% similar profile
Score 70.19
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 | 26.0% | 23.3–29.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.3% | 33.6–41.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.6% | 7.8–9.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.8% | 8.8–10.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.3–6.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.2 |
| Depression among adults | 18.2% | 15.7–21.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.8% | 11.3–14.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.7% | 34.0–41.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 32.1% | 26.5–38.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.4% | 3.1–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.4% | 7.8–11.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.7% | 7.6–9.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.5% | 78.0–82.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.0% | 78.1–83.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.2% | 89.0–91.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.5% | 65.3–73.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 67.0% | 64.0–70.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.6% | 73.5–84.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.9% | 11.7–16.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.5% | 9.1–12.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.7% | 18.5–25.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.4% | 29.4–39.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.2% | 14.4–18.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.7% | 13.2–16.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.1% | 10.8–13.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.5% | 10.2–12.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 26.4% | 23.2–29.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.4–6.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.9% | 6.2–7.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.2% | 10.8–13.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.4% | 3.1–3.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.3% | 4.0–4.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 22.1% | 19.1–25.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.8% | 10.3–13.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 8.6% | 7.5–9.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.9% | 9.6–12.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.8% | 6.1–7.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.3% | 29.9–38.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.9% | 6.1–7.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | GA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.8% (5.6–27.5%) n=709 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 10.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 18.3% (8.4–29.7%) n=713 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 5.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.1% (3.9–22.9%) n=720 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 45.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.3% (9.1–49.2%) n=720 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.1% (0.6–9.6%) n=714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.4% (0.3–12.3%) n=707 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.3% (72.5–96.4%) n=707 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 25.1% (13.6–38.3%) n=707 |
| Homeownership rate | 84.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 73.7% (48.8–89.0%) n=707 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.7% (0.0–5.0%) n=707 |
| Foreign-born population | 8.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 3.8% (0.0–15.8%) n=720 |
| Single-parent households | 52.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.8% (36.1–66.7%) n=705 |
| Population 65+ | 18.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (10.0–28.3%) n=720 |
| Median age | 41.8 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 39.8 yr (33.1–51.4) n=715 |
| Median household income | $118,436 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,254 ($44,032–$106,158) n=677 |
| Median home value | $413,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $215,200 ($91,000–$413,150) n=666 |
| Median gross rent | $1,861 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $993 ($694–$1,769) n=627 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | GA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 79.1 yr ± 0.55 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 76.1 yr (73.3–79.7) n=668 |
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 0.55 years of 79.1, 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