ZIP code
37060
in Eagleville, TennesseePopulation 3,396
54.98/ 100
Ranked #9,463 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 30%)
Ranked #42 of 616 Tennessee ZIPs (top 6.9%)
Ranked #21 of 110 Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin, TN ZIPs (top 19%)
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.
Arsenic in groundwater
1.1%
in the bottom 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS4thDefinition & 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 ›Civic-institution access
0.69 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations 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 ›Distance to a nursing home
10.7 mi
in the top 9.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare- or Medicaid-certified nursing home.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
2.0%
in the bottom 12.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS12thDefinition & 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 ›Crowded housing
4.7%
in the top 14.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS85thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Self-care disability
2.8%
in the bottom 12.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS12thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Vision disability
3.6%
in the bottom 11.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS12thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
16%
in the bottom 19% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS19thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Mammography
78.7%
in the top 20% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS80thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
6.9%
in the bottom 20% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS20thDefinition & 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 ›The read
On the composite measure, Eagleville, Tennessee (ZIP 37060) stands in the top 30% healthiest ZIPs nationally (9,463rd) and the top 6.9% of Tennessee (42nd).
The strongest marks in the data are worth naming first: modeled arsenic is in the bottom 3.6% nationally, and civic registers in the top 7.9% nationally. Pharmacy lies in the top 11.0% nationally, and modeled energy burden is in the bottom 12.4% nationally. Modeled self-care disability registers in the bottom 12.0% nationally, vision disability lies in the bottom 11.8% nationally, and stroke is in the bottom 15.0% nationally. On the other side, distance to a nursing home registers in the top 9.7% nationally, and crowded housing lies in the top 14.9% nationally. Recreation is at the national minimum, shared with about 35% of ZIPs.
For clarity, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. ZIP 37046, just across the boundary, ranks better overall among the ZIPs nearby.
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 Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin, TN metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 69%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 78%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 66%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 72%
11%
Disability
healthier than 78%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 50%
14%
Holding it back
Mental Health
healthier than 20%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 34%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 26%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 88%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 86%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 90%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 92%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 91%
8%
Disability
healthier than 93%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 45%
14%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 30%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 22%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 67%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 65%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 88%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 83%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 84%
8%
Disability
healthier than 78%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 57%
14%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 23%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 16%
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
37034
Tennesseeshares a border
Score 47.35
Closest healthier
37046
Tennesseeshares a border
Score 59.03
Similar health profile
37075
Tennessee98% similar profile
Score 54.79
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 | 29.5% | 26.9–32.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 35.5% | 32.4–38.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.8% | 8.1–9.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.3% | 9.3–11.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.6% | 5.1–6.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.4% | 5.6–7.3 |
| Depression among adults | 27.2% | 24.2–30.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.5% | 9.3–11.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.7% | 34.3–41.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.7% | 30.7–40.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.9% | 2.6–3.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.2% | 9.5–13.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.1% | 6.7–9.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.5% | 73.0–77.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.7% | 74.9–80.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.8% | 87.3–90.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 67.3% | 63.4–71.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 65.3% | 62.4–68.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.7% | 73.0–83.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.4% | 14.1–18.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.6% | 11.7–15.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 20.0% | 17.1–23.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.7% | 30.2–39.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.0% | 14.1–18.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.7% | 15.9–19.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.6% | 11.3–14.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.4% | 12.9–16.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 29.6% | 26.3–33.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.6% | 5.9–7.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.9% | 6.2–7.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.2% | 10.7–13.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.8% | 2.5–3.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–4.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.8% (5.1–26.1%) n=609 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.0% (5.9–24.0%) n=615 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (4.2–19.5%) n=613 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 32.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 19.0% (10.0–42.6%) n=613 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.0% (0.4–9.6%) n=613 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.3–10.1%) n=608 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.7% (76.0–94.9%) n=608 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 27.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.4% (11.8–33.6%) n=608 |
| Homeownership rate | 89.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.7% (53.4–91.5%) n=608 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 4.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.5% (0.0–4.5%) n=608 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.0–8.3%) n=617 |
| Single-parent households | 38.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 52.6% (39.1–68.7%) n=608 |
| Population 65+ | 13.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (11.5–27.9%) n=617 |
| Median age | 38.8 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (33.8–52.5) n=615 |
| Median household income | $97,386 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,577 ($42,745–$94,822) n=594 |
| Median home value | $490,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $215,100 ($120,900–$397,120) n=593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,348 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $908 ($659–$1,523) n=516 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 78.0 yr ± 1.09 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 75.1 yr (72.6–78.1) n=587 |
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 1.09 years of 78.0, 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