ZIP code
36031
in Fort Davis, AlabamaPopulation 143
41.01/ 100
Ranked #26,015 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 19%)
Ranked #366 of 619 Alabama ZIPs (bottom 41%)
Ranked #10 of 15 Auburn-Opelika, AL ZIPs (bottom 33%)
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.
Diabetes
26.2%
in the top 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
61.3%
in the top 0.08% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Stroke
7.1%
in the top 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
0.84%
in the bottom 0.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Binge drinking
9.0%
in the bottom 0.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›Fiber broadband
100%
at the national maximum
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Obesity
48.8%
in the top 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
0.00%
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
25.3%
in the top 3.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
47.3%
in the top 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, Fort Davis, Alabama (ZIP 36031) lands in the bottom 19% nationally (26,015th) and the bottom 41% of Alabama (366th).
A number of measures mark where this area is under strain: modeled diabetes is in the top 0.3% nationally, and high blood pressure settles in the top 0.08% nationally. Modeled stroke resides in the top 1.1% nationally, and obesity registers in the top 1.1% nationally. Modeled mobility disability rests in the top 3.1% nationally, and high cholesterol stands in the top 1.3% nationally. On the brighter side, modeled arsenic lies in the bottom 0.5% nationally, modeled binge drinking lands in the bottom 0.5% nationally, and fiber broadband sits at the national maximum. Housing-cost burden is at the national minimum.
A note on the terms: arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 36083, just across the boundary, ranks better 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 Auburn-Opelika, 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 95%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 86%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 91%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 2%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 8%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 28%
11%
Disability
healthier than 12%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 13%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 16%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 96%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 94%
13%
Mental Health
in the top 0.4%
8%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 50%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 8%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 20%
16%
Disability
healthier than 35%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 10%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 7%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
in the top 0.00%
14%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.00%
13%
Mental Health
in the top 0.00%
8%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 50%
16%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
in the bottom 0.00%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 21%
11%
Disability
healthier than 29%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 14%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 14%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
36039
Alabamashares a border
Score 36.81
Closest healthier
36083
Alabamashares a border
Score 41.13
Similar health profile
29015
South Carolina98% similar profile
Score 43.22
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 | 39.1% | 34.8–43.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 61.3% | 56.6–65.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.0% | 7.0–9.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.4% | 9.0–11.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 11.0% | 8.9–13.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.6% | 8.1–13.5 |
| Depression among adults | 17.2% | 14.1–20.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 26.2% | 22.4–29.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 47.3% | 42.1–52.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 48.8% | 39.3–57.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 7.1% | 5.8–8.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 18.9% | 15.3–23.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.9% | 8.4–16.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 85.8% | 83.5–87.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 86.2% | 83.3–88.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.9% | 87.9–91.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 72.2% | 67.5–76.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 47.9% | 43.9–52.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.3% | 72.3–85.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 9.0% | 7.1–11.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.4% | 13.3–21.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 37.1% | 29.9–44.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 43.6% | 36.4–51.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 31.4% | 25.3–38.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.8% | 12.7–17.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.4% | 13.6–19.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.0% | 12.2–18.0 |
| Any disability among adults | 42.6% | 35.8–49.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.5% | 7.0–10.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.8% | 8.8–13.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 25.3% | 20.4–30.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 7.0% | 5.6–8.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.5% | 6.8–10.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 32.2% | 26.7–37.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 27.5% | 21.3–34.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 21.3% | 16.1–27.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.9% | 14.9–22.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 12.3% | 9.8–14.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.4% | 30.2–42.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 13.1% | 10.6–15.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AL median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 0.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.4% (5.1–31.1%) n=623 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 0.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.7% (5.2–25.2%) n=625 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 36.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 13.2% (3.6–23.0%) n=626 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 24.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 16.9% (6.9–38.8%) n=626 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–11.0%) n=622 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.0% (0.0–12.1%) n=622 |
| Broadband subscription | 73.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 84.9% (68.8–94.9%) n=622 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 0.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.3% (10.1–35.0%) n=622 |
| Homeownership rate | 100.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.3% (54.7–92.5%) n=622 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.3% (0.0–4.2%) n=622 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.3% (0.0–6.2%) n=628 |
| Single-parent households | 63.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 50.9% (35.0–68.6%) n=617 |
| Population 65+ | 31.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (11.9–29.2%) n=628 |
| Median age | 62.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.3 yr (33.4–52.9) n=621 |
| Median household income | $50,476 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $55,896 ($37,738–$88,230) n=587 |
| Median home value | $9,999 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $160,950 ($87,300–$292,680) n=568 |
| Median gross rent | — | $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 | 78.9 yr ± 3.63 | 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 3.63 years of 78.9, 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