ZIP code
35553
in Double Springs, AlabamaPopulation 4,920
40.36/ 100
Ranked #26,511 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 17%)
Ranked #386 of 619 Alabama ZIPs (bottom 38%)
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.
Pharmacy access
0.88 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of pharmacies located 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
45.6%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Grocery access
0.22 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Hearing disability
11.4%
in the top 7.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
70%
in the top 9.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
46.3%
in the top 9.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST57thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility
10.1 mi
in the top 13.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS86thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest facility that handles enough hazardous chemicals to require an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 17% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS17thDefinition & 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
Double Springs, Alabama (ZIP 35553), by its composite score, sits in the bottom 17% nationally (26,511th) and the bottom 38% of Alabama (386th).
The measures fall on both sides for this area, fairly evenly: pharmacy sits in the top 1.4% nationally, and grocery lies in the top 6.1% nationally. Modeled tree cover rests in the top 9.2% nationally. Distance to a community health center resides at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Distance to a nursing home is at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Pulling the other way, modeled high cholesterol lands in the top 3.3% nationally, hearing disability stands in the top 7.0% nationally, and high blood pressure registers in the top 9.2% nationally. Modeled mobility disability settles in the top 11.8% nationally, and independent living disability sits in the top 11.3% nationally.
For anyone unfamiliar, distance to a community health center is a federally funded (HRSA) community health center serving everyone regardless of ability to pay. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 35503, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 85%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 71%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 45%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 12%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 33%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 30%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 22%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 18%
8%
Disability
healthier than 11%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 78%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 89%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 56%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 40%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 33%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 20%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 15%
8%
Disability
healthier than 31%
7%
“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 85.0; chronic-disease standing 11.8 — 73 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #865 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
35503
Alabamashares a border
Score 45.23
Closest healthier
35541
Alabamashares a border
Score 40.99
Similar health profile
65066
Missouri99% similar profile
Score 44.01
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 | 35.9% | 32.2–39.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 46.3% | 41.7–50.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.1% | 9.2–11.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.7% | 8.7–10.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.8% | 10.3–13.4 |
| Depression among adults | 26.5% | 22.6–30.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 16.0% | 13.9–18.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 45.6% | 40.9–50.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 38.6% | 30.2–47.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.9% | 4.5–5.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 20.1% | 16.7–23.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.5% | 9.4–13.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.7% | 76.9–82.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.7% | 75.9–83.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.1% | 82.0–86.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.3% | 58.0–68.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 54.9% | 50.7–59.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.4% | 63.9–79.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.8% | 11.1–16.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 19.9% | 17.2–23.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 33.6% | 28.6–39.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 37.4% | 30.4–44.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 27.5% | 24.1–31.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.5% | 16.4–20.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.7% | 15.6–20.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.9% | 16.7–21.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 42.8% | 37.9–48.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.4% | 10.1–12.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.0% | 10.7–13.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 21.4% | 18.8–24.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.6% | 5.0–6.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.3–7.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.9% | 20.3–27.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 19.5% | 16.6–22.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 14.8% | 12.5–17.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.4% | 10.6–14.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.7% | 8.4–11.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 35.6% | 30.2–41.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.5% | 7.3–9.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AL median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.4% (5.1–31.1%) n=623 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.7% (5.2–25.2%) n=625 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 21.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 13.2% (3.6–23.0%) n=626 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 14.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 16.9% (6.9–38.8%) n=626 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–11.0%) n=622 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.0% (0.0–12.1%) n=622 |
| Broadband subscription | 85.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 84.9% (68.8–94.9%) n=622 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 16.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.3% (10.1–35.0%) n=622 |
| Homeownership rate | 79.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.3% (54.7–92.5%) n=622 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.3% (0.0–4.2%) n=622 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.3% (0.0–6.2%) n=628 |
| Single-parent households | 55.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (35.0–68.6%) n=617 |
| Population 65+ | 18.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (11.9–29.2%) n=628 |
| Median age | 40.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.3 yr (33.4–52.9) n=621 |
| Median household income | $63,207 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $55,896 ($37,738–$88,230) n=587 |
| Median home value | $108,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $160,950 ($87,300–$292,680) n=568 |
| Median gross rent | $586 | $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 | 74.3 yr ± 0.58 | 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 0.58 years of 74.3, 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