ZIP code
38685
in Waterford, MississippiPopulation 1,301
35.20/ 100
Ranked #29,316 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 8.6%)
Ranked #299 of 406 Mississippi ZIPs (bottom 26%)
Ranked #62 of 81 Memphis, TN-MS-AR ZIPs (bottom 23%)
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.
Diabetes
21.3%
in the top 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST81stUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
53.4%
in the top 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST80thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Self-care disability
7.8%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST74thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Stroke
6.4%
in the top 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST79thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
25.7%
in the top 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST80thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Vision disability
9.7%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST70thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Home broadband subscription
64%
in the bottom 3.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST11thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
31.1%
in the top 6.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST72ndUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
8.0%
in the bottom 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST20thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
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 ›Binge drinking
11.4%
in the bottom 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST29thUS4thDefinition & 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 ›The read
In overall standing, Waterford, Mississippi (ZIP 38685) comes out in the bottom 8.6% nationally (29,316th) and the bottom 26% of Mississippi (299th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
The profile opens on the burdens that define it most: modeled diabetes settles in the top 2.2% nationally, high blood pressure registers in the top 1.3% nationally, and self-care disability stands in the top 3.3% nationally. Modeled stroke lands in the top 2.5% nationally, mobility disability is in the top 2.7% nationally, and vision disability resides in the top 5.5% nationally. Home broadband subscription rests in the bottom 3.8% nationally, and modeled fair or poor health lies in the top 6.5% nationally. More positively, modeled pfas sits in the bottom 5.0% nationally, and binge drinking settles in the bottom 4.3% nationally.
In plain terms, pfas is the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down; here a modeled estimate of the chance a private well contains them. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 38601, just across the boundary.
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 Memphis, TN-MS-AR metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 91%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 64%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 4%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 6%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 26%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 12%
11%
Disability
healthier than 4%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 23%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 23%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 79%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 70%
13%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 64%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 52%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 17%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 30%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 32%
11%
Disability
healthier than 24%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 12%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 98%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 84%
8%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 41%
13%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 47%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 13%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 7%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 33%
11%
Disability
healthier than 18%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 13%
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
38601
Mississippishares a border
Score 45.56
Closest healthier
38635
Mississippishares a border
Score 39.58
Similar health profile
39633
Mississippi100% similar profile
Score 31.05
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 | 37.9% | 34.3–41.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 53.4% | 49.2–57.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.9% | 8.0–9.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.4% | 9.1–11.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.7% | 9.7–11.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 12.6% | 11.1–14.1 |
| Depression among adults | 19.7% | 16.8–22.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 21.3% | 18.9–23.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 44.4% | 40.1–48.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 42.7% | 35.1–50.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 6.4% | 5.9–7.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 22.1% | 18.6–25.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.3% | 10.3–14.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 84.4% | 82.3–86.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 83.4% | 80.4–86.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.8% | 85.0–88.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 61.8% | 56.8–66.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 7.8% | 6.6–9.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.2% | 64.0–79.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 11.4% | 9.3–13.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 21.8% | 19.0–25.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 39.3% | 34.3–44.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.7% | 33.4–46.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 31.1% | 27.7–34.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.7% | 15.7–19.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 18.6% | 16.6–20.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 19.3% | 17.2–21.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 45.3% | 40.6–50.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.6–12.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 13.0% | 11.7–14.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 25.7% | 23.0–28.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 7.8% | 7.0–8.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 9.7% | 8.8–10.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 29.0% | 25.2–32.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 27.3% | 23.8–30.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 18.8% | 16.1–21.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.6% | 16.2–21.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 14.0% | 12.4–15.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.2% | 31.5–41.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 13.5% | 11.9–15.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MS median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 19.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 19.9% (8.3–37.0%) n=406 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 15.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 16.8% (8.1–29.3%) n=410 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 22.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 14.4% (5.9–25.0%) n=411 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 3.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.0% (7.1–33.6%) n=411 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.8% (0.0–14.2%) n=411 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 5.5% (0.0–13.9%) n=405 |
| Broadband subscription | 64.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 79.7% (62.7–93.0%) n=405 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 24.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.7% (9.7–36.0%) n=405 |
| Homeownership rate | 95.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.2% (49.8–91.7%) n=405 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.4% (0.0–5.0%) n=405 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.6% (0.0–4.4%) n=412 |
| Single-parent households | 78.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 46.9% (29.2–61.4%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 43.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.8% (11.7–26.2%) n=412 |
| Median age | 61.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 39.5 yr (30.5–49.6) n=411 |
| Median household income | $41,210 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $50,353 ($32,100–$72,379) n=377 |
| Median home value | $124,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $118,100 ($72,660–$219,420) n=374 |
| Median gross rent | — | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $827 ($532–$1,130) n=319 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MS median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 75.4 yr ± 0.88 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 75.4 yr (72.7–79.0) n=405 |
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 0.88 years of 75.4, 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