ZIP code
30620
in Bethlehem, GeorgiaPopulation 18,139
53.18/ 100
Ranked #11,816 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 37%)
Ranked #185 of 711 Georgia ZIPs (top 26%)
Ranked #113 of 206 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA ZIPs (bottom 45%)
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.
Air-toxics cancer risk
40 per million
in the top 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
1.3%
in the bottom 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST38thUS8thDefinition & 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 ›Loneliness
38.2%
in the top 8.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST67thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Home broadband subscription
96.9%
in the top 10.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS89thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
5.0%
in the bottom 9.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST13thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 13.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS87thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
0.56%
in the bottom 16% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS16thDefinition & 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 ›The read
By the composite measure, Bethlehem, Georgia (ZIP 30620) sits in the top 37% healthiest ZIPs nationally (11,816th) and the top 26% of Georgia (185th).
Reading across the measures, this area's clearest strengths come through: modeled arsenic sits in the bottom 7.7% nationally, home broadband subscription registers in the top 10.6% nationally, and modeled coronary heart disease lands in the bottom 9.7% nationally. Modeled hearing disability resides in the bottom 12.1% nationally, grocery lies in the top 14.9% nationally, and modeled transportation noise settles in the bottom 16% nationally. By contrast, modeled air-toxics cancer risk stands in the top 4.5% nationally, and loneliness is in the top 8.1% nationally. Modeled industrial-pollution burden rests in the top 13.3% nationally, and humid heat sits in the top 14.2% nationally.
In plain language, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. ZIP 30011, 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 81%
21%
Disability
healthier than 70%
7%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 53%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 44%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 59%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 58%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 20%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 22%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 33%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 85%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 69%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 60%
11%
Disability
healthier than 81%
7%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 56%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 54%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 49%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 10%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 26%
13%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 65%
21%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 44%
16%
Disability
healthier than 58%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 26%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 17%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 33%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 28%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 13%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 34%
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
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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 19.7; chronic-disease standing 80.9 — 61 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,536 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
30011
Georgiashares a border
Score 54.42
Closest healthier
30019
Georgiashares a border
Score 60.94
Similar health profile
67207
Kansas99% similar profile
Score 54.20
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 | 22.9% | 20.6–25.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.8% | 29.7–35.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.4% | 5.9–6.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.0% | 9.0–11.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.5–5.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.2–6.5 |
| Depression among adults | 20.1% | 17.5–22.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.8% | 9.6–12.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.3% | 32.1–38.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 34.8% | 29.3–40.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.9% | 2.7–3.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 14.6% | 12.4–17.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 13.7% | 12.0–15.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.5% | 71.0–75.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.3% | 72.2–78.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.2% | 83.6–86.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.2% | 59.3–67.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 58.9% | 55.9–61.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.7% | 68.9–80.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.2% | 13.9–18.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 14.5% | 12.5–16.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.9% | 22.4–29.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.1% | 33.2–43.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 18.7% | 16.5–20.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.0% | 16.2–19.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.1% | 11.7–14.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.1% | 13.5–16.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 28.3% | 25.0–31.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.6% | 5.0–6.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.2% | 7.3–9.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.9% | 10.5–13.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.5% | 3.2–3.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.8% | 4.4–5.2 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.5% | 21.6–27.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.1% | 14.0–18.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 11.8% | 10.2–13.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.0% | 12.3–15.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.7% | 7.8–9.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 38.2% | 34.0–42.6 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.5% | 7.4–9.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | GA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 11.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.8% (5.6–27.5%) n=709 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 19.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 18.3% (8.4–29.7%) n=713 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.1% (3.9–22.9%) n=720 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 18.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.3% (9.1–49.2%) n=720 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.2% | 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 | 96.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.3% (72.5–96.4%) n=707 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 28.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 25.1% (13.6–38.3%) n=707 |
| Homeownership rate | 77.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 73.7% (48.8–89.0%) n=707 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.7% (0.0–5.0%) n=707 |
| Foreign-born population | 8.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 3.8% (0.0–15.8%) n=720 |
| Single-parent households | 40.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.8% (36.1–66.7%) n=705 |
| Population 65+ | 7.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (10.0–28.3%) n=720 |
| Median age | 32.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 39.8 yr (33.1–51.4) n=715 |
| Median household income | $84,098 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $65,254 ($44,032–$106,158) n=677 |
| Median home value | $341,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $215,200 ($91,000–$413,150) n=666 |
| Median gross rent | $1,733 | $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 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