ZIP code
38039
in Grand Junction, TennesseePopulation 1,305
37.96/ 100
Ranked #28,036 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 12.6%)
Ranked #421 of 616 Tennessee ZIPs (bottom 32%)
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.
Short sleep
47.3%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
10.2%
in the bottom 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & 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 ›Tooth loss
27.1%
in the top 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
19.6%
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
49.9%
in the top 3.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Obesity
46.2%
in the top 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
44.3%
in the top 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Fatal road crashes
38.3 per 100,000 residents per year
in the top 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›Child-care access
0.57 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›Fiber broadband
96.8%
in the top 8.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST72ndUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›The read
Grand Junction, Tennessee (ZIP 38039), on the composite measure, lands in the bottom 12.6% nationally (28,036th) and the bottom 32% of Tennessee (421st).
The main burdens in the data show plainly and lead the picture: modeled short sleep stands in the top 1.2% nationally, tooth loss is in the top 5.1% nationally, and diabetes rests in the top 4.4% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure sits in the top 3.5% nationally, modeled obesity registers in the top 2.9% nationally, and housing-cost burden lands in the top 6.0% nationally. Fatal road crashes resides in the top 7.7% nationally. More positively, modeled binge drinking lies in the bottom 1.6% nationally, and childcare settles in the top 8.1% nationally. Fiber broadband stands in the top 8.4% nationally.
A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 38042, just across the boundary. Modeled diabetes stands in the top 4.4% 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.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 82%
14%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 48%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 9%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 9%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 11%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 19%
8%
Disability
healthier than 15%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 12%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 88%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 78%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 91%
8%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 45%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 22%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 2%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 17%
11%
Disability
healthier than 32%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 6%
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 81.6; chronic-disease standing 8.8 (bottom 10%) — 73 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #900 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
38042
Tennesseeshares a border
Score 38.25
Closest healthier
38057
Tennesseeshares a border
Score 43.62
Similar health profile
35745
Alabama98% similar profile
Score 39.23
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 | 35.0% | 31.8–38.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 49.9% | 45.9–53.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.0% | 6.4–7.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.6% | 11.3–14.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.7% | 7.0–8.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.8% | 8.7–10.9 |
| Depression among adults | 24.0% | 20.9–27.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 19.6% | 17.5–21.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.6% | 35.7–43.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 46.2% | 38.9–53.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.3% | 4.8–5.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 27.1% | 23.1–31.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.6% | 10.3–15.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.3% | 78.0–82.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 82.9% | 80.1–85.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.6% | 87.1–90.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.1% | 58.4–67.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 48.3% | 44.8–52.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 76.6% | 70.0–82.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 10.2% | 8.5–12.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 20.3% | 17.6–23.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 34.6% | 30.0–39.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 47.3% | 41.2–54.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 29.2% | 25.9–32.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.1% | 18.1–22.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.1% | 15.2–18.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.9% | 16.9–21.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 40.6% | 36.4–44.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.8% | 6.1–7.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.9% | 10.6–13.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 22.1% | 19.6–24.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.2% | 5.6–6.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.9% | 7.0–8.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 23.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.8% (5.1–26.1%) n=609 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.0% (5.9–24.0%) n=615 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 25.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (4.2–19.5%) n=613 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 7.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 19.0% (10.0–42.6%) n=613 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 9.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.0% (0.4–9.6%) n=613 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.3–10.1%) n=608 |
| Broadband subscription | 83.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.7% (76.0–94.9%) n=608 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 44.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.4% (11.8–33.6%) n=608 |
| Homeownership rate | 77.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.7% (53.4–91.5%) n=608 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.5% (0.0–4.5%) n=608 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.0–8.3%) n=617 |
| Single-parent households | 57.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 52.6% (39.1–68.7%) n=608 |
| Population 65+ | 22.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (11.5–27.9%) n=617 |
| Median age | 48.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (33.8–52.5) n=615 |
| Median household income | $39,020 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,577 ($42,745–$94,822) n=594 |
| Median home value | $111,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $215,100 ($120,900–$397,120) n=593 |
| Median gross rent | $806 | $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 | 75.5 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 75.5, 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