ZIP code
48611
in Auburn, MichiganPopulation 6,093
58.37/ 100
Ranked #6,093 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 19%)
Ranked #155 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (top 16%)
Too few scored ZIPs in the Bay City, MI metro area to rank within it.
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.
Child-care access
0.77 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›Elder-services access
0.31 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.15 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics located 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 ›Arsenic in groundwater
15.4%
in the top 9.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST80thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
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 ›Mammography
80.4%
in the top 9.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Uninsured (under 65)
5.3%
in the bottom 8.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST19thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›The read
Auburn, Michigan (ZIP 48611), in overall standing, comes out in the top 19% healthiest ZIPs nationally (6,093rd) and the top 16% of Michigan (155th).
The measures that most flatter this area set the tone for the rest: childcare resides in the top 4.2% nationally, elder services sits in the top 4.4% nationally, and mental-health providers stands in the top 6.4% nationally. Modeled mammography resides in the top 9.1% nationally, tooth loss sits in the bottom 10.1% nationally, and short sleep stands in the bottom 16% nationally. Modeled colon screening resides in the top 13.2% nationally. Outer-floodplain exposure sits at the national minimum, shared with about 36% of ZIPs. Modeled uninsured stands in the bottom 8.3% nationally. Against that, modeled arsenic resides in the top 9.7% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Outer-floodplain exposure is land with a lower but real 1-in-500 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "500-year floodplain". The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 48642, 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 Bay City, 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 64%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 74%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 70%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 91%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 77%
11%
Disability
healthier than 75%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 88%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 63%
5%
Holding it back
Mental Health
healthier than 32%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 74%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 77%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 62%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 79%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 79%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 72%
8%
Disability
healthier than 77%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 64%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 66%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
in the top 0.00%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.00%
16%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.00%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.00%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 75%
8%
Disability
in the top 0.00%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 75%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 50%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 25%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
48623
Michiganshares a border
Score 58.00
Closest healthier
48642
Michiganshares a border
Score 59.74
Similar health profile
49866
Michigan99% similar profile
Score 58.24
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 | 30.1% | 26.5–33.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.6% | 30.4–39.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.0% | 9.1–11.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.2% | 9.8–12.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.6% | 5.9–7.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.4% | 6.4–8.5 |
| Depression among adults | 26.4% | 22.7–30.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.6% | 9.0–12.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.8% | 30.6–39.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.5% | 28.4–43.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 2.9–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.4% | 5.9–9.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.3% | 4.3–6.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.5% | 74.2–80.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.9% | 76.5–83.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.5% | 86.9–90.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 71.4% | 66.7–75.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 74.7% | 71.6–77.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.4% | 73.7–85.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.8% | 13.8–20.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.1% | 10.8–15.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.0% | 18.0–26.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.3% | 25.8–37.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.9% | 13.6–18.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.5% | 14.5–18.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.0% | 11.3–14.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.1% | 11.3–15.0 |
| Any disability among adults | 28.0% | 23.9–32.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.4% | 6.4–8.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.2% | 10.4–14.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.7–3.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.9% | 3.4–4.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.4% | 17.2–24.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.5% | 8.5–12.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.3% | 7.5–11.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.3% | 6.9–9.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.0% | 5.1–7.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.3% | 25.5–35.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.2% | 5.2–7.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 7.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 34.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 86.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 22.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 83.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 45.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 23.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 45.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $87,963 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $177,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $933 | $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 | 79.2 yr ± 0.97 | 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 0.97 years of 79.2, 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