ZIP code
48109
in Ann Arbor, MichiganPopulation 5,939
44.45/ 100
Ranked #22,966 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 28%)
Ranked #817 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (bottom 16%)
Ranked #15 of 15 Ann Arbor, MI ZIPs (bottom 6.7%)
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.
High cholesterol
11.6%
in the bottom 0.06% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
31.8%
in the top 0.08% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
18.2%
in the top 0.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›High blood pressure
13.9%
in the bottom 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
2.3%
in the bottom 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
1.4%
in the bottom 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Transit access
26 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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 ›Slow internet speeds
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes whose fastest available download speed is under 10 Mbps.
Full methodology ›Poverty rate
97.7%
in the top 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›Stroke
0.90%
in the bottom 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›The read
Judged by its overall standing, ZIP 48109, one of several in Ann Arbor, Michigan sits in the bottom 28% nationally (22,966th) and the bottom 16% of Michigan (817th).
The profile carries real weight, and several readings make that plain: modeled cognitive disability stands in the top 0.08% nationally, modeled independent living disability resides in the top 0.5% nationally, and slow internet speeds sits at the national maximum. Poverty stands in the top 0.3% nationally, and housing-cost burden resides in the top 0.4% nationally. Better still, modeled high blood pressure sits in the bottom 0.6% nationally, and diabetes stands in the bottom 0.6% nationally. Modeled coronary heart disease resides in the bottom 0.8% nationally, and transit sits in the top 0.2% nationally. Modeled stroke stands in the bottom 0.8% nationally.
Placed beside its immediate neighbors, transit runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A healthier nearby ZIP overall is ZIP 48104, 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 Ann Arbor, MI metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 98%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 65%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 74%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 77%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 3%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 20%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 3%
13%
Mental Health
in the bottom 0.00%
8%
Disability
healthier than 29%
7%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
in the top 0.5%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 64%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 80%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 5%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 11%
14%
Preventive Care
in the bottom 0.3%
13%
Mental Health
in the bottom 0.00%
8%
Disability
healthier than 20%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 28%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 86%
21%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 50%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
in the bottom 0.00%
16%
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.00%
14%
Preventive Care
in the bottom 0.00%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 7%
11%
Mental Health
in the bottom 0.00%
8%
Disability
in the bottom 0.00%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 36%
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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 20.5; chronic-disease standing 97.9 (top 10%) — 77 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,012 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
48104
Michiganshares a border
Score 58.41
Closest healthier
48105
Michiganshares a border
Score 69.51
Similar health profile
66045
Kansas99% similar profile
Score 42.71
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 | 6.3% | 5.5–7.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 13.9% | 12.2–15.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 0.9% | 0.8–1.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 14.4% | 12.9–16.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 1.4% | 1.3–1.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.6% | 3.9–5.3 |
| Depression among adults | 40.9% | 37.2–44.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 2.3% | 2.0–2.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 11.6% | 10.1–13.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 28.7% | 24.9–32.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 0.9% | 0.8–1.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 24.6% | 20.7–28.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.3% | 7.7–11.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 22.0% | 18.5–25.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 68.1% | 64.2–71.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 58.6% | 53.7–63.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 61.1% | 56.8–65.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 54.1% | 50.9–57.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 66.4% | 59.7–72.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 19.7% | 16.9–22.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.7% | 10.6–15.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.2% | 19.0–25.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.2% | 27.7–34.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 21.4% | 18.7–24.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 32.6% | 29.3–35.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.6% | 11.0–14.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 31.8% | 28.2–35.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 40.0% | 35.8–44.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.2–4.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 18.2% | 15.9–20.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 5.6% | 4.7–6.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.9% | 2.5–3.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.1% | 7.1–9.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.1% | 19.8–26.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 36.7% | 31.6–42.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 38.7% | 33.3–44.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 20.6% | 17.3–24.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 25.4% | 22.2–29.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 45.2% | 40.5–49.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 17.6% | 15.0–20.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 97.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 1.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 0.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 77.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 13.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 58.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 100.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 87.2% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 0.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 10.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | — | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 0.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 19.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $14,093 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | — | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $1,453 | $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 unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
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