ZIP code
35072
in Goodwater, AlabamaPopulation 4,914
43.73/ 100
Ranked #23,669 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 26%)
Ranked #279 of 619 Alabama ZIPs (top 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.
Arsenic in groundwater
0.91%
in the bottom 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST11thUS1stDefinition & 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 blood pressure
48.2%
in the top 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST68thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities 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 ›Grocery access
0.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets 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. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›Tree cover
70.5%
in the top 8.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 31% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS31stDefinition & 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 ›The read
By the composite health measure, Goodwater, Alabama (ZIP 35072) ranks in the bottom 26% nationally (23,669th) and the top 45% of Alabama (279th).
A number of measures pull each way for this area: modeled arsenic lands in the bottom 1.0% nationally, and elder services sits in the top 7.0% nationally. Grocery is in the top 7.1% nationally, and modeled tree cover settles in the top 8.9% nationally. Modeled binge drinking resides in the bottom 10.6% nationally. Distance to a nursing home registers at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Set against that, modeled high blood pressure rests in the top 5.7% nationally, humid heat stands in the top 10.7% nationally, and diabetes lies in the top 10.2% nationally. Modeled short sleep lands in the top 13.1% nationally.
To spell things out, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. Close by, ZIP 35136, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 76%
14%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 57%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 44%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 50%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 15%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 24%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 27%
11%
Disability
healthier than 18%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 37%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 63%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 65%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 67%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 73%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 45%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 48%
11%
Disability
healthier than 46%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 39%
21%
“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 76.3; chronic-disease standing 14.5 — 62 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #1,600 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
35010
Alabamashares a border
Score 41.61
Closest healthier
35136
Alabamashares a border
Score 45.20
Similar health profile
29353
South Carolina99% similar profile
Score 45.14
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 | 34.5% | 31.9–37.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 48.2% | 45.0–51.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.7% | 8.1–9.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.7% | 9.7–11.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.6% | 7.9–9.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.7% | 8.7–10.6 |
| Depression among adults | 22.7% | 20.2–25.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 17.4% | 15.7–19.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 43.0% | 39.7–46.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 42.2% | 36.2–48.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.1% | 4.7–5.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 18.8% | 16.0–21.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.7% | 9.2–12.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.8% | 78.8–82.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.7% | 79.4–84.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.6% | 85.2–88.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.6% | 62.8–70.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 53.9% | 50.7–57.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.1% | 71.7–81.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.6% | 10.9–14.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.6% | 15.6–19.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 32.5% | 28.6–36.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 40.9% | 35.7–46.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 26.8% | 24.4–29.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.7% | 16.1–19.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.2% | 14.8–17.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.3% | 15.7–18.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 40.4% | 36.8–43.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.1% | 8.3–9.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.2% | 10.2–12.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 20.6% | 18.8–22.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.6% | 5.2–6.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.5–7.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 27.5% | 24.6–30.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 22.3% | 20.0–24.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 16.9% | 14.9–19.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.7% | 14.0–17.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.8% | 9.8–12.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.3% | 32.5–40.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.7% | 9.6–11.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AL median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.4% (5.1–31.1%) n=623 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 11.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.7% (5.2–25.2%) n=625 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 14.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 13.2% (3.6–23.0%) n=626 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 18.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 16.9% (6.9–38.8%) n=626 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–11.0%) n=622 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.0% (0.0–12.1%) n=622 |
| Broadband subscription | 86.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 84.9% (68.8–94.9%) n=622 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 16.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.3% (10.1–35.0%) n=622 |
| Homeownership rate | 78.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.3% (54.7–92.5%) n=622 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.3% (0.0–4.2%) n=622 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.3% (0.0–6.2%) n=628 |
| Single-parent households | 58.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (35.0–68.6%) n=617 |
| Population 65+ | 23.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (11.9–29.2%) n=628 |
| Median age | 44.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.3 yr (33.4–52.9) n=621 |
| Median household income | $51,028 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $55,896 ($37,738–$88,230) n=587 |
| Median home value | $98,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $160,950 ($87,300–$292,680) n=568 |
| Median gross rent | $756 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $856 ($625–$1,266) n=503 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AL median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 74.4 yr ± 0.87 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 74.7 yr (72.1–78.3) n=599 |
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 0.87 years of 74.4, 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