ZIP code
48230
in Grosse Pointe Park, MichiganPopulation 17,174
67.64/ 100
Ranked #1,108 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 3.5%)
Ranked #29 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (top 3.0%)
Ranked #23 of 215 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI ZIPs (top 10.7%)
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.
Loneliness
26.6%
in the bottom 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
6.8%
in the bottom 3.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
4.5%
in the bottom 3.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Median household income
$137,310
in the top 5.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
6.4%
in the bottom 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
9.1%
in the bottom 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
0.00%
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Civic-institution access
0.91 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations 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 ›Colon-cancer screening
74.7%
in the top 3.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
4.5%
in the bottom 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›The read
Grosse Pointe Park, Michigan (ZIP 48230), overall, ranks in the top 3.5% healthiest ZIPs nationally (1,108th) and the top 3.0% of Michigan (29th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
Reading the numbers as a whole, the picture lands somewhere in between: modeled loneliness sits in the bottom 2.1% nationally, food insecurity lands in the bottom 3.1% nationally, and transportation lies in the bottom 3.8% nationally. Household income stands in the top 5.6% nationally, modeled housing insecurity rests in the bottom 4.0% nationally, and modeled cognitive disability registers in the bottom 2.3% nationally. Civic resides in the top 4.9% nationally. Distance to an emergency room settles at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Modeled colon screening is in the top 3.5% nationally. On the other side, modeled tree cover sits at the national minimum.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. ZIP 48067, about 10 miles away, comes out 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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 85%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 96%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 98%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 92%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 68%
8%
Disability
healthier than 96%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 92%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 82%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 25%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 94%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 97%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 93%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 93%
8%
Disability
healthier than 98%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 74%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 84%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 15%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 95%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 87%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 81%
8%
Disability
healthier than 93%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 81%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 75%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 31%
14%
“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.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 81.4 ± 2.0 years. The 47 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 74.7 years — 6.7 years above them.
Ranked #17 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
48224
Michiganshares a border
Score 32.42
Closest healthier
48067
Michiganabout 10 mi away
Score 68.30
Similar health profile
48178
Michigan100% similar profile
Score 64.87
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 | 26.5% | 24.4–28.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.4% | 29.0–33.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.0% | 9.2–10.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.4% | 9.3–11.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.2% | 4.7–5.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.4–5.7 |
| Depression among adults | 23.6% | 21.2–26.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.5% | 7.5–9.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.9% | 33.4–38.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 27.6% | 24.6–30.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.5% | 2.3–2.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 4.5% | 3.7–5.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 3.2% | 2.7–3.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.9% | 74.4–79.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.4% | 79.1–83.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 91.4% | 90.2–92.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 74.7% | 71.8–77.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 80.5% | 78.6–82.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 81.8% | 77.8–85.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.5% | 15.3–19.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.2% | 7.0–9.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 15.7% | 13.8–17.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.6% | 28.8–34.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 12.0% | 10.6–13.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.4% | 12.9–15.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.2% | 9.1–11.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 9.1% | 8.0–10.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 21.7% | 19.5–23.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.6% | 5.0–6.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.2% | 4.6–5.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 8.8% | 7.8–9.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.2% | 2.0–2.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.7% | 2.5–3.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 17.9% | 15.7–20.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.8% | 5.7–8.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 5.4% | 4.4–6.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.4% | 5.4–7.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.5% | 3.9–5.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 26.6% | 23.7–29.5 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.7% | 4.1–5.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 4.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 2.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 73.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 98.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 20.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 78.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.2% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 8.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 55.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 21.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 42.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $137,310 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $466,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $1,479 | $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 | 81.4 yr ± 1.01 | 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 1.01 years of 81.4, 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