ZIP code
38838
in Dennis, MississippiPopulation 1,122
36.32/ 100
Ranked #28,845 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 10.1%)
Ranked #284 of 406 Mississippi ZIPs (bottom 30%)
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.
Fiber broadband
99.9%
in the top 2.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Fatal road crashes
53.5 per 100,000 residents per year
in the top 3.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Mobility disability
23.2%
in the top 6.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST64thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
11.6%
in the top 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
20.6%
in the top 7.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST77thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
1.2%
in the bottom 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST22ndUS7thDefinition & 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 ›Self-care disability
6.6%
in the top 7.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST58thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
7.8%
in the bottom 7.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
12.7%
in the top 7.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST65thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
24.2%
in the top 8.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST65thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›The read
Dennis, Mississippi (ZIP 38838), on the composite measure, lands in the bottom 10.1% nationally (28,845th) and the bottom 30% of Mississippi (284th).
The readings split fairly evenly between strengths and concerns: fiber broadband sits in the top 2.0% nationally, modeled arsenic registers in the bottom 6.8% nationally, and housing-cost burden lands in the bottom 7.1% nationally. Unemployment resides at the national minimum, shared with about 15% of ZIPs. Working the other way, fatal road crashes lies in the top 3.2% nationally, and modeled mobility disability settles in the top 6.4% nationally. Modeled hearing disability stands in the top 6.0% nationally, and cognitive disability is in the top 7.2% nationally. Modeled self-care disability rests in the top 7.9% nationally, and independent living disability sits in the top 7.9% nationally.
In everyday language, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 38827, 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.
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%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 45%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 9%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 30%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 11%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 12%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 31%
8%
Disability
healthier than 6%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 29%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 69%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 78%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 83%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 31%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 9%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 29%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 4%
8%
Disability
healthier than 31%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 39%
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 91.0 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 8.5 (bottom 10%) — 83 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #382 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
38827
Mississippishares a border
Score 44.91
Closest healthier
38847
Mississippishares a border
Score 44.91
Similar health profile
30457
Georgia99% similar profile
Score 33.60
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 | 36.5% | 32.7–40.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 46.6% | 42.0–51.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.7% | 8.7–10.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.1% | 8.8–11.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.2% | 9.0–11.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 13.0% | 11.1–14.9 |
| Depression among adults | 23.4% | 19.8–27.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 16.9% | 14.6–19.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 43.3% | 38.7–48.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 41.7% | 33.3–50.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.4% | 4.8–6.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 24.2% | 20.0–28.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.6% | 10.1–15.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 81.1% | 78.5–83.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.1% | 76.5–83.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.3% | 82.1–86.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 58.2% | 52.5–63.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 7.5% | 6.3–8.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 68.3% | 59.3–76.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.1% | 11.4–17.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 22.1% | 18.7–25.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 38.2% | 32.5–43.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.1% | 29.6–43.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 28.7% | 24.8–32.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.8% | 16.6–21.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 18.8% | 16.4–21.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 20.6% | 18.0–23.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 43.8% | 38.6–49.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.6% | 10.2–13.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.7% | 11.0–14.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 23.2% | 20.2–26.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.6% | 5.8–7.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.3% | 7.3–9.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.4% | 21.7–29.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 21.8% | 18.3–25.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 14.1% | 11.6–16.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.2% | 12.0–16.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.6% | 10.0–13.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.4% | 28.6–38.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.1% | 8.6–11.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MS median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 28.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 19.9% (8.3–37.0%) n=406 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 13.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 16.8% (8.1–29.3%) n=410 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 14.4% (5.9–25.0%) n=411 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 7.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.0% (7.1–33.6%) n=411 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.8% (0.0–14.2%) n=411 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 5.5% (0.0–13.9%) n=405 |
| Broadband subscription | 77.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 79.7% (62.7–93.0%) n=405 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 7.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.7% (9.7–36.0%) n=405 |
| Homeownership rate | 92.2% | 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 | 6.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.6% (0.0–4.4%) n=412 |
| Single-parent households | 44.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 46.9% (29.2–61.4%) n=404 |
| Population 65+ | 17.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.8% (11.7–26.2%) n=412 |
| Median age | 40.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 39.5 yr (30.5–49.6) n=411 |
| Median household income | $46,528 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $50,353 ($32,100–$72,379) n=377 |
| Median home value | $136,100 | $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 | 75.8 yr ± 0.72 | 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 0.72 years of 75.8, 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