ZIP code
35802
in Huntsville, AlabamaPopulation 23,858
59.82/ 100
Ranked #4,995 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 16%)
Ranked #26 of 619 Alabama ZIPs (top 4.3%)
Ranked #9 of 31 Huntsville, AL ZIPs (top 29%)
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.
Physician access
2.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ offices 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 ›Colon-cancer screening
74.3%
in the top 4.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Fatal road crashes
2.5 per 100,000 residents per year
in the bottom 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 9.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›PFOA in drinking water
88.3%
in the top 9.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOA, one of the man-made “forever chemicals,” was detected in EPA testing.
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 ›PFOS in drinking water
88.3%
in the top 9.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOS, one of the most common “forever chemicals,” was detected in EPA testing.
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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 10.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS90thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
0.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 11.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS89thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental offices 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 ›Homeownership rate
54%
in the bottom 11.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST9thUS11thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.8%
in the bottom 9.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS9thDefinition & 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 ›The read
ZIP 35802, one of several in Huntsville, Alabama ranks in the top 16% healthiest ZIPs nationally (4,995th) and the top 4.3% of Alabama (26th).
The strongest marks in the data are worth naming first: physicians stands in the top 5.8% nationally, and modeled colon screening sits in the top 4.2% nationally. Fatal road crashes resides in the bottom 8.7% nationally, and dental providers stands in the top 11.0% nationally. Distance to an emergency room sits in the bottom 11.3% nationally. On the other side, modeled industrial-pollution burden resides in the top 9.3% nationally, PFOA in drinking water stands in the top 9.3% nationally, and PFOS in drinking water sits in the top 9.6% nationally. Modeled expected annual loss resides in the top 10.1% nationally, and homeownership stands in the bottom 11.4% nationally.
Against its neighbors, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. PFOA in drinking water is one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. PFOS in drinking water is a common one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 35741, 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 Huntsville, AL metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 90%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 89%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 89%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 82%
8%
Disability
healthier than 69%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 87%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 59%
21%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 28%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 36%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 88%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 96%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 95%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 98%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 97%
8%
Disability
healthier than 91%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 70%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 88%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 77%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 93%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 83%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 90%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 50%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 43%
14%
Disability
healthier than 57%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 50%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
“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.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 79.5 ± 1.3 years. The 47 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 76.4 years — 3.2 years above them.
Ranked #717 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
35741
Alabamashares a border
Score 62.17
Closest healthier
35763
Alabamashares a border
Score 63.98
Similar health profile
65809
Missouri99% similar profile
Score 61.05
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 | 30.9% | 27.9–34.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 39.5% | 35.9–43.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.8% | 9.8–11.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.0% | 7.9–10.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.9% | 6.2–7.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.0% | 5.3–6.8 |
| Depression among adults | 21.3% | 18.3–24.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.6% | 10.1–13.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.3% | 37.5–45.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.8% | 30.4–41.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.4% | 3.1–3.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.0% | 7.3–11.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.1% | 5.9–8.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.2% | 75.5–80.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.7% | 78.7–84.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.6% | 87.1–90.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 74.3% | 70.2–78.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 64.9% | 61.5–68.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.9% | 73.5–85.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.8% | 11.5–16.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.6% | 8.2–11.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.2% | 18.1–24.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.7% | 29.8–39.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.4% | 14.3–18.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.1% | 12.5–15.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.6% | 10.2–13.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.3% | 10.8–13.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.2% | 27.7–35.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.9% | 7.9–9.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.4% | 11.8–15.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.0% | 2.7–3.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.5% | 17.6–23.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.1% | 8.7–11.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.7% | 5.8–7.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.1% | 7.0–9.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.2% | 5.5–7.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.0% | 28.8–37.6 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.5% | 4.8–6.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AL median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 7.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.4% (5.1–31.1%) n=623 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 11.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.7% (5.2–25.2%) n=625 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 5.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 13.2% (3.6–23.0%) n=626 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 52.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 16.9% (6.9–38.8%) n=626 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–11.0%) n=622 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.0% (0.0–12.1%) n=622 |
| Broadband subscription | 93.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 84.9% (68.8–94.9%) n=622 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 26.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.3% (10.1–35.0%) n=622 |
| Homeownership rate | 54.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.3% (54.7–92.5%) n=622 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.3% (0.0–4.2%) n=622 |
| Foreign-born population | 5.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.3% (0.0–6.2%) n=628 |
| Single-parent households | 56.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (35.0–68.6%) n=617 |
| Population 65+ | 23.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (11.9–29.2%) n=628 |
| Median age | 40.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.3 yr (33.4–52.9) n=621 |
| Median household income | $76,324 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $55,896 ($37,738–$88,230) n=587 |
| Median home value | $334,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $160,950 ($87,300–$292,680) n=568 |
| Median gross rent | $1,154 | $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 | 79.5 yr ± 0.65 | 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 0.65 years of 79.5, 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