ZIP code
38488
in Taft, TennesseePopulation 2,138
46.81/ 100
Ranked #20,397 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 36%)
Ranked #158 of 616 Tennessee ZIPs (top 26%)
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
1.3%
in the bottom 8.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST15thUS8thDefinition & 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 ›Walkability
2.5 intersections/sq mi
in the bottom 11.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST4thUS11thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
1.1%
in the bottom 12.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS13thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite measure, Taft, Tennessee (ZIP 38488) sits in the bottom 36% nationally (20,397th) and the top 26% of Tennessee (158th).
The readings split fairly evenly between strengths and concerns: modeled arsenic lands in the bottom 8.1% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise resides at the national minimum, shared with about 22% of ZIPs. Floodplain exposure lies in the bottom 12.8% nationally. Outer-floodplain exposure settles at the national minimum, shared with about 36% of ZIPs. Working the other way, walkability stands in the bottom 11.1% nationally, and poverty is in the top 16% nationally. Recreation rests at the national minimum, shared with about 35% of ZIPs. Physicians sits at the national minimum, shared with about 38% of ZIPs. Modeled industrial-pollution burden registers in the top 20% nationally, and humid heat lands in the top 20% nationally.
In plain language, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. ZIP 35739, just across the boundary, ranks healthier overall.
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 69%
14%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 43%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 51%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 44%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 31%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 15%
8%
Disability
healthier than 38%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 32%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 66%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 67%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 81%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 73%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 86%
8%
Disability
healthier than 73%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 82%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 38%
16%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 28%
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
35739
Alabamashares a border
Score 47.98
Closest healthier
35750
Alabamashares a border
Score 52.14
Similar health profile
26817
West Virginia98% similar profile
Score 41.88
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 | 34.4% | 30.7–38.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 41.7% | 37.3–46.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.8% | 8.9–10.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.5% | 9.3–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.8% | 6.9–8.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.5% | 8.2–10.9 |
| Depression among adults | 27.7% | 23.8–31.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.1% | 12.2–16.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.9% | 37.3–46.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.6% | 31.6–48.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.9% | 3.5–4.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 12.4% | 10.0–15.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.9% | 9.0–12.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.9% | 74.8–80.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.2% | 74.5–81.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.1% | 86.4–89.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.0% | 60.6–71.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 61.8% | 58.0–65.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.8% | 67.7–82.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.2% | 11.6–17.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 18.3% | 15.5–21.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 26.7% | 22.3–31.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 37.1% | 30.4–44.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.7% | 19.6–26.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.3% | 16.1–20.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.0% | 14.0–18.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.8% | 14.7–19.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 36.0% | 31.4–40.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.8% | 7.7–9.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.0% | 7.9–10.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 16.9% | 14.5–19.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.6–4.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.1% | 4.5–5.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 21.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 13.8% (5.1–26.1%) n=609 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 13.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.0% (5.9–24.0%) n=615 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 12.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 11.6% (4.2–19.5%) n=613 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 20.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 19.0% (10.0–42.6%) n=613 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.0% (0.4–9.6%) n=613 |
| Households without a vehicle | 6.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.9% (0.3–10.1%) n=608 |
| Broadband subscription | 83.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.7% (76.0–94.9%) n=608 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 15.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.4% (11.8–33.6%) n=608 |
| Homeownership rate | 86.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.7% (53.4–91.5%) n=608 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.5% | 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 | 61.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 52.6% (39.1–68.7%) n=608 |
| Population 65+ | 20.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (11.5–27.9%) n=617 |
| Median age | 51.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (33.8–52.5) n=615 |
| Median household income | $77,875 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,577 ($42,745–$94,822) n=594 |
| Median home value | $261,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $215,100 ($120,900–$397,120) n=593 |
| Median gross rent | $690 | $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 | 76.1 yr ± 1.25 | 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 1.25 years of 76.1, 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