ZIP code
48386
in White Lake, MichiganPopulation 17,856
58.43/ 100
Ranked #6,051 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 19%)
Ranked #150 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (top 15%)
Ranked #76 of 215 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI ZIPs (top 35%)
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.
PFAS in drinking water
68.9%
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Park land
24.9%
in the top 5.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
10.1%
in the top 8.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
1.4 mi
in the bottom 8.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST10thUS9thDefinition & 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 ›Uninsured (under 65)
5.4%
in the bottom 9.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST21stUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
15.1%
in the top 25% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS75thDefinition & 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 ›The read
ZIP 48386, one of several in White Lake, Michigan, by its composite score, sits in the top 19% healthiest ZIPs nationally (6,051st) and the top 15% of Michigan (150th).
The standout strengths in the data are the natural place to begin: park land lands in the top 5.7% nationally, and lithium in drinking water stands in the bottom 11.4% nationally. Distance to a nursing home registers at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Modeled tooth loss settles in the bottom 11.5% nationally, colon screening sits in the top 12.3% nationally, and short sleep lies in the bottom 18% nationally. On the other side, modeled pfas rests in the top 4.8% nationally, modeled transportation noise resides in the top 8.5% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site is in the bottom 8.6% nationally. Modeled expected annual loss lands in the top 14.2% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, 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 Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 48346, 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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 65%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 76%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 87%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 81%
11%
Disability
healthier than 76%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 44%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 55%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 56%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 55%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 76%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 80%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 68%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 83%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 89%
8%
Disability
healthier than 78%
7%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 58%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 29%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 8%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 61%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 71%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 71%
8%
Disability
healthier than 60%
7%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 59%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 57%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 59%
13%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 7%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 37%
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
48329
Michiganshares a border
Score 57.69
Closest healthier
48346
Michiganshares a border
Score 61.98
Similar health profile
01701
Massachusetts99% similar profile
Score 66.09
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 | 28.0% | 25.7–30.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.0% | 33.3–38.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.9% | 9.0–10.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.2% | 10.1–12.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.8% | 6.1–7.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.5% | 6.6–8.5 |
| Depression among adults | 23.2% | 20.8–25.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.6% | 9.4–12.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.0% | 33.4–38.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 32.8% | 29.1–36.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 3.0–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.7% | 6.3–9.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.4% | 4.6–6.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.2% | 76.8–81.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.0% | 78.6–83.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.8% | 88.4–91.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 71.6% | 68.4–75.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 71.6% | 69.1–74.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.1% | 68.9–79.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.0% | 13.9–18.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.3% | 11.4–15.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 20.6% | 17.9–23.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.6% | 28.5–35.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.4% | 14.5–18.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.2% | 14.5–18.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.1% | 11.6–14.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.6% | 11.1–14.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 26.1% | 23.3–29.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.3–7.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.4–8.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.1% | 10.6–13.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.3% | 3.0–3.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.5% | 17.8–23.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.1% | 9.3–13.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.4% | 7.8–11.2 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.6% | 7.3–10.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.2% | 5.3–7.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.6% | 27.0–34.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.3% | 5.4–7.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 34.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 28.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 83.3% | 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 | 5.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 54.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 21.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 45.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $89,702 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $321,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $1,489 | $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 | 78.9 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 78.9, 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