ZIP code
35466
in Gordo, AlabamaPopulation 4,906
44.92/ 100
Ranked #22,496 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 30%)
Ranked #248 of 619 Alabama ZIPs (top 40%)
Ranked #17 of 31 Tuscaloosa, AL 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.
Elder-services access
0.18 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS92ndDefinition & 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
0.18 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST88thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Obesity
43.8%
in the top 6.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST77thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Walkability
2.3 intersections/sq mi
in the bottom 9.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST12thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
44%
in the top 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST72ndUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Distance to an emergency room
13.9 mi
in the top 13.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS87thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare-certified hospital with an emergency room.
Full methodology ›The read
Gordo, Alabama (ZIP 35466) ranks in the bottom 30% nationally (22,496th) and the top 40% of Alabama (248th).
Several signals sit on each side of the ledger here: elder services settles in the top 8.3% nationally, and grocery rests in the top 9.0% nationally. Pharmacy lands in the top 10.5% nationally. Distance to a community health center settles at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Working the other way, modeled obesity rests in the top 6.7% nationally, walkability lands in the bottom 9.6% nationally, and modeled high cholesterol settles in the top 6.8% nationally. Modeled humid heat rests in the top 11.0% nationally, modeled high blood pressure lands in the top 11.9% nationally, and distance to an emergency room settles in the top 13.3% nationally.
For context, humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. Distance to a community health center is a federally funded (HRSA) community health center serving everyone regardless of ability to pay. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 35457, 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. Compare it against the US, this state and the Tuscaloosa, AL metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 82%
14%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 42%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 58%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 58%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 18%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 39%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 31%
8%
Disability
healthier than 22%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 25%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 65%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 74%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 66%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 67%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 62%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 47%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 43%
8%
Disability
healthier than 53%
7%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 39%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 63%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 70%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 60%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 63%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 57%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 53%
13%
Disability
healthier than 40%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 37%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 33%
8%
“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 82.3; chronic-disease standing 18.3 — 64 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #1,453 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
35442
Alabamashares a border
Score 32.49
Closest healthier
35457
Alabamashares a border
Score 52.24
Similar health profile
72543
Arkansas98% similar profile
Score 43.46
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 | 33.7% | 30.5–37.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 45.2% | 41.2–49.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.3% | 8.5–10.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.5% | 7.6–9.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.8% | 8.5–11.1 |
| Depression among adults | 24.7% | 21.4–28.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.4% | 13.5–17.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 44.0% | 39.9–48.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 43.8% | 36.6–51.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.6% | 4.2–5.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 17.0% | 14.1–20.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.0% | 8.2–11.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.6% | 77.0–82.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.2% | 78.0–84.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.9% | 84.0–87.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.2% | 64.0–72.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 58.3% | 54.8–62.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.7% | 69.2–81.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.8% | 11.5–16.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.4% | 14.8–20.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 30.4% | 25.8–35.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 37.3% | 31.7–43.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 25.0% | 21.7–28.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.9% | 15.9–20.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.0% | 14.1–17.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.3% | 15.2–19.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 39.1% | 34.5–43.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.7% | 8.7–10.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.5–12.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 19.0% | 16.5–21.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.1% | 4.6–5.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.4% | 5.7–7.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.0% | 20.7–27.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.9% | 16.1–22.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 14.2% | 12.0–16.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.2% | 11.3–15.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.6% | 8.4–10.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.3% | 29.7–39.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.2% | 8.0–10.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AL median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 15.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.4% (5.1–31.1%) n=623 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 10.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.7% (5.2–25.2%) n=625 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 13.2% (3.6–23.0%) n=626 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 15.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 16.9% (6.9–38.8%) n=626 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–11.0%) n=622 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.0% (0.0–12.1%) n=622 |
| Broadband subscription | 82.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 84.9% (68.8–94.9%) n=622 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 14.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.3% (10.1–35.0%) n=622 |
| Homeownership rate | 83.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.3% (54.7–92.5%) n=622 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.3% (0.0–4.2%) n=622 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.3% (0.0–6.2%) n=628 |
| Single-parent households | 53.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (35.0–68.6%) n=617 |
| Population 65+ | 17.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (11.9–29.2%) n=628 |
| Median age | 40.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.3 yr (33.4–52.9) n=621 |
| Median household income | $53,083 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $55,896 ($37,738–$88,230) n=587 |
| Median home value | $132,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $160,950 ($87,300–$292,680) n=568 |
| Median gross rent | $621 | $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 | 73.9 yr ± 0.98 | 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 0.98 years of 73.9, 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