ZIP code
48066
in Roseville, MichiganPopulation 47,123
46.21/ 100
Ranked #21,085 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 34%)
Ranked #735 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (bottom 24%)
Ranked #167 of 215 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI ZIPs (bottom 22%)
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.
Floodplain exposure
0.00%
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Lead in tap water
8.4 ppb
in the top 4.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
US95thDefinition & source ›
The lead level at the 90th percentile of tap-water samples reported by the public water systems serving this ZIP, in parts per billion — the EPA requires action above 15 ppb.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›PFAS in drinking water
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFAS — man-made “forever chemicals” that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down — were detected in EPA testing.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
0.9 mi
in the bottom 7.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST9thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Superfund site — an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has listed for cleanup.
Full methodology ›Walkability
120 intersections/sq mi
in the top 8.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 9.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
0.00%
in the bottom 10.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST6thUS11thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 14.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS85thDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
6.9%
in the top 15% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS85thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite health measure, Roseville, Michigan (ZIP 48066) ranks in the bottom 34% nationally (21,085th) and the bottom 24% of Michigan (735th).
The signals balance out across the profile, strengths against concerns: floodplain exposure stands at the national minimum, and walkability lies in the top 8.1% nationally. Distance to a nursing home lands at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Set against that, lead in tap water sits in the top 4.6% nationally, modeled expected annual loss is in the top 4.7% nationally, and PFAS in drinking water settles at the national maximum. Distance to a Superfund site resides in the bottom 7.0% nationally, modeled industrial-pollution burden registers in the top 9.6% nationally, and modeled tree cover rests in the bottom 10.7% nationally. Modeled disaster risk stands in the top 14.9% nationally.
Read against the ZIPs closest to it, outer-floodplain exposure runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To spell things out, lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. PFAS in drinking water is the family of man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. Close by, ZIP 48026, 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. 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 62%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 90%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 69%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 46%
21%
Disability
healthier than 44%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 27%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 15%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 15%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 11%
8%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 68%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 72%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 55%
21%
Disability
healthier than 41%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 28%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 7%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 27%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 9%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 20%
8%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 74%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 58%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 30%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 25%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 24%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 18%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 15%
8%
Disability
healthier than 29%
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
2 of our published findings list 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 73.7 ± 0.8 years. A median household income of $62,182 predicts 78.2 years — 4.5 years below.
Ranked #5,361 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 73.7 ± 0.8 years. The 47 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 76.5 years — 2.9 years below them.
Ranked #2,250 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
48021
Michiganshares a border
Score 41.59
Closest healthier
48026
Michiganshares a border
Score 49.05
Similar health profile
15478
Pennsylvania99% similar profile
Score 47.46
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 | 29.4% | 26.9–32.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.9% | 34.7–41.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.9% | 7.2–8.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.2% | 10.9–13.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.6% | 6.0–7.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.8% | 8.0–9.7 |
| Depression among adults | 27.6% | 24.5–30.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.7% | 10.3–13.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.2% | 33.0–39.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 40.5% | 35.9–45.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.7% | 3.4–3.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.8% | 11.4–16.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.5% | 6.5–8.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.8% | 74.2–79.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.5% | 77.7–83.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.1% | 84.4–87.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.9% | 61.8–69.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 64.4% | 61.2–67.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.0% | 71.1–82.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.1% | 14.6–19.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 18.0% | 15.9–20.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 28.6% | 25.2–32.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 40.1% | 36.1–44.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.2% | 19.9–24.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.6% | 17.7–21.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.2% | 13.6–16.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.8% | 15.2–18.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.4% | 31.0–37.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.7% | 6.0–7.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.9% | 9.0–10.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.9% | 13.3–16.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.3% | 3.9–4.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–5.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.9% | 22.7–29.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 19.4% | 17.0–21.9 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 18.4% | 16.3–20.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.4% | 13.5–17.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.1% | 9.0–11.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 35.6% | 31.3–40.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 11.3% | 9.9–12.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 12.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 15.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 8.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 30.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 65.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 5.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 45.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 17.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 41.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $62,182 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $155,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $1,233 | $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 | 73.7 yr ± 0.40 | 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 0.40 years of 73.7, 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