ZIP code
47562
in Odon, IndianaPopulation 4,967
41.23/ 100
Ranked #25,853 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 19%)
Ranked #668 of 757 Indiana ZIPs (bottom 11.8%)
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.
Households without a vehicle
19.4%
in the top 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities 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 ›Grocery access
0.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Loneliness
37.5%
in the top 10.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
19.4%
in the top 12.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS88thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
12.5%
in the bottom 15% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS15thDefinition & 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 ›Mammography
70.9%
in the bottom 18% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST6thUS18thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
10.5%
in the top 23% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS77thDefinition & 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 ›Colon-cancer screening
62.1%
in the bottom 23% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST7thUS23rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›The read
By its overall health score, Odon, Indiana (ZIP 47562) lands in the bottom 19% nationally (25,853rd) and the bottom 11.8% of Indiana (668th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
The measures split the difference for this area: elder services sits in the top 7.1% nationally, and grocery rests in the top 7.3% nationally. Distance to a nursing home is at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Modeled pfas stands in the bottom 15% nationally, and poverty settles in the bottom 16% nationally. Against that, households without a vehicle lies in the top 4.7% nationally, modeled loneliness resides in the top 10.5% nationally, and modeled cognitive disability lands in the top 12.1% nationally. Modeled arsenic registers in the top 14.8% nationally. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility sits at the national minimum, shared with about 31% of ZIPs.
To translate a couple of terms, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. 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. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility is a plant handling large amounts of hazardous chemicals that must file an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases. Overall, the nearest healthier neighbor is ZIP 47449, 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 62%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 67%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 42%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 29%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 34%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 16%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 20%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 7%
8%
Disability
healthier than 26%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 82%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 68%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 36%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 25%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 5%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 16%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 5%
8%
Disability
healthier than 10%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 22%
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
47449
Indianashares a border
Score 46.10
Closest healthier
47522
Indianashares a border
Score 48.84
Similar health profile
37083
Tennessee99% similar profile
Score 39.41
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 | 30.5% | 27.2–33.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.9% | 33.8–42.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.7% | 7.9–9.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.0% | 10.6–13.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.9% | 7.1–8.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.5% | 9.3–11.9 |
| Depression among adults | 28.1% | 24.2–32.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 13.1% | 11.3–14.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.5% | 35.1–43.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.9% | 32.4–47.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 19.8% | 16.7–23.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.5% | 9.5–13.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.9% | 73.1–78.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.0% | 73.3–80.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 81.4% | 79.2–83.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 62.1% | 56.8–67.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 54.8% | 51.1–58.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.9% | 62.2–78.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.8% | 13.9–20.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 20.5% | 17.8–23.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 30.8% | 26.1–35.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.6% | 28.0–41.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 25.3% | 22.0–28.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.5% | 18.2–22.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.7% | 14.7–18.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 19.4% | 17.1–21.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 37.4% | 32.9–42.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.6% | 7.7–9.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.3% | 15.0–19.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.0–5.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.9% | 5.2–6.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 26.0% | 22.3–29.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.1% | 15.3–21.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.6% | 8.8–12.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.2% | 10.4–14.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.9% | 7.7–10.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 37.5% | 32.3–42.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.4% | 7.2–9.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | IN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 4.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.8% (3.3–23.6%) n=764 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 36.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 8.3% (2.5–19.0%) n=761 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 29.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 8.8% (3.0–19.3%) n=766 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 13.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 19.4% (8.1–38.5%) n=766 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.4% (0.0–8.2%) n=760 |
| Households without a vehicle | 19.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.0–11.5%) n=764 |
| Broadband subscription | 83.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (76.7–95.9%) n=764 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 17.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.0% (9.8–33.1%) n=764 |
| Homeownership rate | 78.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.7% (58.9–94.5%) n=764 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–4.2%) n=764 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.3% (0.0–8.8%) n=767 |
| Single-parent households | 36.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 53.2% (40.5–69.1%) n=756 |
| Population 65+ | 15.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.2% (11.0–26.5%) n=767 |
| Median age | 29.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.5 yr (32.5–49.6) n=756 |
| Median household income | $71,250 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $71,016 ($50,417–$99,531) n=721 |
| Median home value | $194,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $178,250 ($109,430–$287,310) n=724 |
| Median gross rent | $548 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $925 ($704–$1,261) n=640 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | IN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 77.3 yr ± 0.70 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 78.5 yr (75.1–81.5) n=754 |
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 0.70 years of 77.3, 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