ZIP code
48652
in Rhodes, MichiganPopulation 1,832
50.00/ 100
Ranked #16,242 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 49%)
Ranked #496 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (bottom 49%)
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.
Homeownership rate
98.4%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Walkability
1.7 intersections/sq mi
in the bottom 5.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST2ndUS6thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Park land
25.1%
in the top 5.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
0.32%
in the bottom 8.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST22ndUS9thDefinition & 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 ›Civic-institution access
0.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Transportation noise
0.33%
in the bottom 12.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS13thDefinition & 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 ›PFAS in drinking water
14.8%
in the bottom 21% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS21stDefinition & 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 ›The read
On the composite measure, Rhodes, Michigan (ZIP 48652) stands in the bottom 49% nationally (16,242nd) and the bottom 49% of Michigan (496th).
A profile of give and take, with clear readings each way: homeownership registers in the top 5.5% nationally, and park land lies in the top 5.6% nationally. Floodplain exposure is in the bottom 8.8% nationally, and civic registers in the top 9.9% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise lies at the national minimum, shared with about 22% of ZIPs. Modeled transportation noise is in the bottom 12.6% nationally. On the other side, walkability registers in the bottom 5.6% nationally. Fiber broadband lies at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Distance to a nursing home is in the top 13.3% nationally. Recreation registers at the national minimum, shared with about 35% of ZIPs.
Set beside the wider area around it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For clarity, floodplain exposure is land with about a 1-in-100 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "100-year floodplain". Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. Transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. ZIP 48628, just across the boundary, ranks better overall among the ZIPs nearby.
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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 97%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 70%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 95%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 41%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 50%
11%
Disability
healthier than 48%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 33%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 13%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 19%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 95%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 88%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 47%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 42%
11%
Disability
healthier than 47%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 36%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 38%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 28%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 13%
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.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 96.7 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 41.0 — 56 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #2,061 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
48612
Michiganshares a border
Score 46.38
Closest healthier
48628
Michiganshares a border
Score 54.09
Similar health profile
49322
Michigan98% similar profile
Score 49.69
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 | 31.8% | 29.5–34.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.3% | 34.4–40.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.5% | 8.9–10.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.9% | 11.0–13.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.6% | 6.9–8.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.5% | 8.5–10.5 |
| Depression among adults | 28.0% | 25.5–30.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.1% | 10.9–13.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.9% | 34.1–39.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 38.2% | 33.1–43.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.8% | 3.5–4.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.6% | 9.8–13.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.6% | 5.6–7.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.7% | 75.5–79.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.6% | 77.1–81.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.1% | 85.7–88.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.6% | 65.1–71.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 67.4% | 64.8–69.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.5% | 70.1–80.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.7% | 14.7–18.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.5% | 15.4–19.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.6% | 22.5–28.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.9% | 28.9–36.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.1% | 18.0–22.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.7% | 17.2–20.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.4% | 14.0–16.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.6% | 14.1–17.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 32.0% | 28.9–35.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.0% | 7.3–8.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.1% | 8.2–10.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.8% | 13.2–16.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.7–4.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.5–5.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.0% | 20.4–25.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.3% | 12.5–16.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 13.7% | 11.8–15.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.7% | 9.3–12.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.7% | 6.9–8.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.9% | 28.6–35.5 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.9% | 7.0–8.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 14.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 9.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.2% | 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 | 91.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 19.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 98.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 68.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 21.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 43.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $69,766 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $171,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | — | $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 | 77.1 yr ± 0.90 | 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 0.90 years of 77.1, 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