ZIP code
37219
in Nashville, TennesseePopulation 2,398
62.45/ 100
Ranked #3,262 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 10.2%)
Ranked #13 of 616 Tennessee ZIPs (top 2.2%)
Ranked #8 of 110 Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin, TN ZIPs (top 7.3%)
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.
Outpatient-care access
4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.09% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics 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 ›Transit access
38 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.10% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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 ›Dental provider access
3.5 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Civic-institution access
3.5 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Recreation access
3.5 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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 ›Walkability
310 intersections/sq mi
in the top 0.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Grocery access
0.44 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Binge drinking
21.5%
in the top 2.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Homeownership rate
20%
in the bottom 2.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Physician access
4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›The read
ZIP 37219, one of several in Nashville, Tennessee, on the composite measure, lands in the top 10.2% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,262nd) and the top 2.2% of Tennessee (13th).
Where the data leans one way, another reading answers it: outpatient resides in the top 0.09% nationally, transit lies in the top 0.10% nationally, and dental providers settles in the top 0.3% nationally. Civic stands in the top 0.4% nationally, recreation is in the top 0.4% nationally, and walkability rests in the top 0.7% nationally. Grocery sits in the top 2.0% nationally, and physicians registers in the top 2.1% nationally. On the other hand, modeled binge drinking lands in the top 2.4% nationally, and homeownership resides in the bottom 2.0% nationally.
Set against the neighboring ZIPs, outpatient runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 37205, about 2.3 miles away.
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 98%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.8%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 76%
11%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 76%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 58%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 5%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 34%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 17%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 99%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.7%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 94%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 89%
8%
Disability
in the top 0.5%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 86%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 77%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 60%
13%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 4%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 96%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 1.0%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 87%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 81%
8%
Disability
in the top 1.0%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
in the top 1.0%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 72%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 46%
13%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
“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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 4.9 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 97.6 (top 10%) — 93 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #18,023 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
37201
Tennesseeshares a border
Score 61.25
Closest healthier
37205
Tennesseeabout 2.3 mi away
Score 63.55
Similar health profile
55303
Minnesota97% similar profile
Score 57.75
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 | 19.6% | 17.3–22.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 24.6% | 21.7–27.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.7% | 5.1–6.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.5% | 8.3–10.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 3.3% | 2.8–3.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.7% | 3.1–4.6 |
| Depression among adults | 28.8% | 25.3–32.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 6.7% | 5.7–7.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 30.8% | 27.4–34.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 26.5% | 22.1–31.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 1.7% | 1.5–1.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.1% | 4.9–7.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.5% | 5.8–9.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 66.7% | 63.3–69.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.2% | 68.3–75.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.9% | 83.5–88.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.2% | 63.9–72.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 65.2% | 62.2–68.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.2% | 71.6–83.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 21.5% | 18.3–24.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.3% | 7.1–12.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 15.8% | 12.8–19.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.2% | 28.0–36.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 12.9% | 10.6–15.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.1% | 14.8–19.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.1% | 7.8–10.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.8% | 10.6–15.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 23.2% | 19.6–27.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.2% | 3.6–4.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.4–6.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 7.0% | 5.8–8.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 1.8% | 1.5–2.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.7% | 2.3–3.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 3.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.8% (5.1–26.1%) n=609 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.0% (5.9–24.0%) n=615 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 0.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (4.2–19.5%) n=613 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 90.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 19.0% (10.0–42.6%) n=613 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.0% (0.4–9.6%) n=613 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.3–10.1%) n=608 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.7% (76.0–94.9%) n=608 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 47.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.4% (11.8–33.6%) n=608 |
| Homeownership rate | 20.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.7% (53.4–91.5%) n=608 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.5% (0.0–4.5%) n=608 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.0–8.3%) n=617 |
| Single-parent households | 70.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 52.6% (39.1–68.7%) n=608 |
| Population 65+ | 5.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (11.5–27.9%) n=617 |
| Median age | 30.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (33.8–52.5) n=615 |
| Median household income | $105,476 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,577 ($42,745–$94,822) n=594 |
| Median home value | $640,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $215,100 ($120,900–$397,120) n=593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,225 | $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 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 ▾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