Skip to main content
ZipVitals

Menu

ZIP code

36769

in Pine Hill, AlabamaPopulation 2,071

ZipVitals Score
How is the ZipVitals Score calculated? →

27.48/ 100

Ranked #31,177 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 2.8%)

Ranked #598 of 619 Alabama ZIPs (bottom 3.4%)

Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.

Robust across all 9 health domains

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.

Self-care disability

9.3%

in the top 1.2% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST95th
US99th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.

Full methodology ›

Diabetes

24.2%

in the top 0.7% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST94th
US99th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.

Full methodology ›

Stroke

7.2%

in the top 1.0% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST95th
US99th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.

Full methodology ›

High blood pressure

56.9%

in the top 0.5% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST93rd
US99th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.

Full methodology ›

Independent-living disability

16%

in the top 1.7% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST96th
US98th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.

Full methodology ›

Vision disability

11.7%

in the top 2.4% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST95th
US98th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.

Full methodology ›

Mobility disability

28.2%

in the top 1.1% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST95th
US99th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.

Full methodology ›

Fair or poor health

36.9%

in the top 1.6% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST96th
US98th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.

Full methodology ›

Obesity

51.3%

in the top 0.4% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST96th
US99th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.

Full methodology ›

Binge drinking

9.9%

in the bottom 1.2% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST7th
US1st
Definition & 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 ›

Cross-source signals

Combined exposures in this ZIP

More than one environmental exposure stands out in this ZIP. Each is established independently and shown on its own above; they are grouped here for context — not because one causes the other.

The read

Pine Hill, Alabama (ZIP 36769), on the composite measure, lands in the bottom 2.8% nationally (31,177th) and the bottom 3.4% of Alabama (598th).

continue reading

Where this area is stretched, the data is unambiguous: modeled self-care disability rests in the top 1.2% nationally, diabetes sits in the top 0.7% nationally, and stroke registers in the top 1.0% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure lands in the top 0.5% nationally, independent living disability resides in the top 1.7% nationally, and vision disability lies in the top 2.4% nationally. Modeled mobility disability settles in the top 1.1% nationally, and fair or poor health stands in the top 1.6% nationally. Modeled obesity is in the top 0.4% nationally. Better still, modeled binge drinking rests in the bottom 1.2% nationally.

A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 36435, just across the boundary. Modeled high blood pressure rests in the top 0.5% nationally.

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.

Compare within

Lifting this score

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 92%

14%

About typical

Healthcare Access

healthier than 41%

5%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 1%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 1%

16%

Preventive Care

healthier than 32%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 5%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 33%

8%

Disability

healthier than 1%

7%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 8%

5%

Lifting this score

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 89%

14%

About typical

Mental Health

healthier than 47%

8%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 41%

5%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 5%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 5%

16%

Preventive Care

healthier than 22%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 7%

11%

Disability

healthier than 3%

7%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 7%

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 ›

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 91.6 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 1.4 (bottom 10%) — 90 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.

    Ranked #113 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.

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
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Arthritis among adults36.8%33.6–40.1
High blood pressure among adults56.9%53.3–60.7
Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults7.2%6.5–7.8
Current asthma among adults12.0%10.7–13.3
Coronary heart disease among adults10.7%9.8–11.8
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults12.8%11.5–14.2
Depression among adults21.7%18.8–24.9
Diagnosed diabetes among adults24.2%21.7–26.7
High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened43.9%40.0–47.9
Obesity among adults51.3%43.8–58.8
Stroke among adults7.2%6.7–7.8
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years27.0%22.8–31.4
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years14.7%12.5–17.3
Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure82.2%80.1–84.2
Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults83.5%80.7–86.0
Cholesterol screening among adults84.9%82.9–86.8
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years60.3%55.4–65.0
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults45.2%41.2–49.1
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years76.4%69.4–82.5
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Binge drinking among adults9.9%8.2–11.9
Current cigarette smoking among adults22.8%20.0–25.7
No leisure-time physical activity among adults41.8%37.0–46.9
Short sleep duration among adults44.9%38.2–51.7
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults36.9%33.4–40.4
Frequent mental distress among adults19.8%17.7–21.9
Frequent physical distress among adults19.3%17.3–21.4
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Cognitive disability among adults21.3%19.1–23.5
Any disability among adults48.3%43.9–52.7
Hearing disability among adults9.8%8.9–10.9
Independent living disability among adults16.0%14.4–17.6
Mobility disability among adults28.2%25.5–31.0
Self-care disability among adults9.3%8.4–10.2
Vision disability among adults11.7%10.6–12.7
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Lack of social and emotional support among adults32.3%28.4–36.7
Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults39.0%34.8–43.3
Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults34.9%30.8–39.1
Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults26.3%23.2–29.5
Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults18.5%16.4–20.7
Loneliness among adults39.9%34.9–45.3
Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults20.0%17.6–22.4
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)AL median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate31.9%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,36415.4% (5.1–31.1%) n=623
Uninsured 18–6412.6%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,28613.7% (5.2–25.2%) n=625
No HS diploma (25+)19.8%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,50513.2% (3.6–23.0%) n=626
Bachelor's or higher (25+)10.9%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50516.9% (6.9–38.8%) n=626
Unemployment rate (16+)13.6%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2744.2% (0.0–11.0%) n=622
Households without a vehicle12.5%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3224.0% (0.0–12.1%) n=622
Broadband subscription76.9%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32284.9% (68.8–94.9%) n=622
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)24.2%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32221.3% (10.1–35.0%) n=622
Homeownership rate76.2%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32278.3% (54.7–92.5%) n=622
Crowded housing (>1 per room)6.0%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3221.3% (0.0–4.2%) n=622
Foreign-born population0.3%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,5531.3% (0.0–6.2%) n=628
Single-parent households36.2%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08750.9% (35.0–68.6%) n=617
Population 65+16.9%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55319.0% (11.9–29.2%) n=628
Median age36.2 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29241.3 yr (33.4–52.9) n=621
Median household income$36,884$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$55,896 ($37,738–$88,230) n=587
Median home value$73,600$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$160,950 ($87,300–$292,680) n=568
Median gross rent$703$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$856 ($625–$1,266) n=503
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)AL median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled.
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