ZIP code
37640
in Butler, TennesseePopulation 3,851
34.84/ 100
Ranked #29,452 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 8.2%)
Ranked #504 of 616 Tennessee ZIPs (bottom 18%)
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.
Mobility disability
24.4%
in the top 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
46.1%
in the top 2.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Grocery access
0.27 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Park land
29%
in the top 4.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
79.1%
in the top 5.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
10.8%
in the top 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
48.4%
in the top 5.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
18.5%
in the top 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
30.4%
in the top 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
11.5%
in the top 6.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›The read
On the composite measure, Butler, Tennessee (ZIP 37640) stands in the bottom 8.2% nationally (29,452nd) and the bottom 18% of Tennessee (504th).
A balanced set of signals defines this area, not any single one: grocery rests in the top 4.3% nationally, and park land lands in the top 4.9% nationally. Modeled tree cover settles in the top 5.2% nationally. By contrast, modeled mobility disability rests in the top 4.3% nationally, high cholesterol lands in the top 2.6% nationally, and coronary heart disease settles in the top 5.1% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure rests in the top 5.4% nationally, diabetes lands in the top 6.8% nationally, and fair or poor health settles in the top 7.6% nationally. Modeled hearing disability rests in the top 6.5% nationally.
Set beside the wider area around it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. ZIP 28622, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 81%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 62%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 4%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 39%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 33%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 13%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 5%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 87%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 91%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 57%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 47%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 7%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 34%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 22%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 33%
8%
Disability
healthier than 12%
7%
“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 81.4; chronic-disease standing 3.6 (bottom 10%) — 78 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #607 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
28622
North Carolinashares a border
Score 47.94
Closest healthier
28679
North Carolinashares a border
Score 54.47
Similar health profile
37727
Tennessee100% similar profile
Score 34.62
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 | 41.3% | 37.9–44.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 48.4% | 44.6–52.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.9% | 10.1–11.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.6% | 10.5–12.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.8% | 9.8–11.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 14.4% | 12.7–16.1 |
| Depression among adults | 30.8% | 27.4–34.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 18.5% | 16.5–20.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 46.1% | 42.3–49.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.6% | 33.1–46.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–5.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 22.8% | 19.7–26.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 13.1% | 11.0–15.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.7% | 78.3–82.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.9% | 77.1–82.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.2% | 85.6–88.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.5% | 59.3–68.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 53.2% | 50.0–56.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.0% | 65.8–78.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.2% | 10.4–14.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 23.7% | 20.8–26.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 34.6% | 30.0–38.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.1% | 34.0–45.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 30.4% | 27.2–33.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.2% | 18.2–22.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 20.3% | 18.2–22.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 20.3% | 18.3–22.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 45.1% | 40.8–49.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.5% | 10.3–12.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.6% | 11.3–14.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 24.4% | 21.7–27.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.5–6.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.6% | 6.8–8.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 21.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.8% (5.1–26.1%) n=609 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 19.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.0% (5.9–24.0%) n=615 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 15.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (4.2–19.5%) n=613 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 20.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 19.0% (10.0–42.6%) n=613 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.0% (0.4–9.6%) n=613 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.3–10.1%) n=608 |
| Broadband subscription | 70.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.7% (76.0–94.9%) n=608 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 13.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.4% (11.8–33.6%) n=608 |
| Homeownership rate | 85.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.7% (53.4–91.5%) n=608 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.5% (0.0–4.5%) n=608 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.0–8.3%) n=617 |
| Single-parent households | 66.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 52.6% (39.1–68.7%) n=608 |
| Population 65+ | 28.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (11.5–27.9%) n=617 |
| Median age | 53.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (33.8–52.5) n=615 |
| Median household income | $55,402 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,577 ($42,745–$94,822) n=594 |
| Median home value | $174,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $215,100 ($120,900–$397,120) n=593 |
| Median gross rent | $687 | $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 | 73.1 yr ± 0.92 | 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 0.92 years of 73.1, 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