ZIP code
48035
in Clinton Township, MichiganPopulation 33,569
49.76/ 100
Ranked #16,565 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 48%)
Ranked #508 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (bottom 48%)
Ranked #144 of 215 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI ZIPs (bottom 33%)
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.
Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
1.5%
in the top 12.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS88thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
0.12%
in the bottom 15% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST7thUS15thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Outer-floodplain exposure
2.0%
in the top 15% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS85thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 0.2%-annual-chance flood band — the “500-year” zone, a lower but real 1-in-500 yearly chance.
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 ›Loneliness
35.1%
in the top 23% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS77thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
38.7%
in the top 26% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS74thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›The read
Judged by its overall standing, ZIP 48035, one of several in Clinton Township, Michigan sits in the bottom 48% nationally (16,565th) and the bottom 48% of Michigan (508th).
A balanced showing across the data, with a few readings each side: walkability sits in the top 11.4% nationally, and subsidized affordable housing stands in the top 11.6% nationally. Distance to a nursing home resides at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Floodplain exposure sits in the bottom 16% nationally. On the other hand, modeled expected annual loss stands in the top 7.7% nationally, and loud transportation noise resides in the top 12.1% nationally. Modeled tree cover sits in the bottom 15% nationally, and outer-floodplain exposure stands in the top 15% nationally. Distance to a Superfund site resides in the bottom 17% nationally, and modeled transportation noise sits in the top 19% nationally.
Placed beside its immediate neighbors, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put plainly, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Subsidized affordable housing is the main federal tax-credit program (HUD) funding affordable rental housing, counted as local units it supports. A healthier nearby ZIP overall is ZIP 48045, 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 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 79%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 91%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 65%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 51%
21%
Disability
healthier than 53%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 27%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 30%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 19%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 60%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 71%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 69%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 51%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 51%
8%
Disability
healthier than 53%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 29%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 11%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 17%
11%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 79%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 43%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 37%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 26%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 26%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 29%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 36%
8%
Disability
healthier than 36%
7%
“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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 76.7 ± 1.3 years. A median household income of $73,015 predicts 78.8 years — 2.2 years below.
Ranked #2,923 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
48026
Michiganshares a border
Score 49.05
Closest healthier
48045
Michiganshares a border
Score 52.88
Similar health profile
16411
Pennsylvania98% similar profile
Score 52.68
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 | 29.8% | 27.2–32.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.9% | 34.8–41.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.6% | 7.8–9.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.9% | 10.7–13.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.6% | 6.0–7.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.2% | 7.4–9.2 |
| Depression among adults | 26.4% | 23.4–29.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.4% | 10.1–12.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.7% | 33.6–40.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 38.9% | 34.3–43.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–3.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.7% | 8.8–12.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.1% | 6.0–8.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.0% | 75.5–80.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.4% | 78.7–83.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.3% | 85.7–88.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.1% | 64.2–71.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 67.6% | 64.6–70.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.1% | 72.4–82.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.5% | 14.1–19.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.0% | 14.1–18.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 27.4% | 24.1–30.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.7% | 34.8–42.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.8% | 18.6–23.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.4% | 16.6–20.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.5% | 13.0–16.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.6% | 14.0–17.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 33.3% | 30.0–36.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.8% | 6.1–7.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.2% | 8.3–10.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.4% | 12.8–16.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.9% | 3.6–4.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.0% | 4.6–5.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.3% | 22.0–28.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.3% | 14.9–19.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 15.8% | 13.7–17.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.9% | 12.1–15.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.1% | 8.0–10.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 35.1% | 30.9–39.5 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.0% | 8.7–11.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 20.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 6.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 26.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 67.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 6.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 46.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 18.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 39.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $73,015 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $192,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $1,135 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $972 ($719–$1,368) n=849 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 76.7 yr ± 0.68 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 78.6 yr (75.7–81.6) n=940 |
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 0.68 years of 76.7, 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