ZIP code
48756
in Prescott, MichiganPopulation 4,060
34.33/ 100
Ranked #29,616 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 7.7%)
Ranked #938 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (bottom 3.6%)
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.
Coronary heart disease
11.3%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
13.1%
in the top 6.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Stroke
5.7%
in the top 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Self-care disability
6.7%
in the top 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
11.5%
in the top 6.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
22.7%
in the top 7.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
5.3%
in the top 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
29.1%
in the top 10.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
56.1%
in the top 9.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Child-care access
0.49 per 1,000 residents
in the top 10.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS89thDefinition & 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 ›The read
Judged by its overall standing, Prescott, Michigan (ZIP 48756) sits in the bottom 7.7% nationally (29,616th) and the bottom 3.6% of Michigan (938th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
A balanced showing across the data, with a few readings each side: childcare stands in the top 10.9% nationally. On the other hand, modeled coronary heart disease resides in the top 3.3% nationally, independent living disability sits in the top 6.4% nationally, and stroke stands in the top 6.0% nationally. Modeled self-care disability resides in the top 7.4% nationally, and hearing disability sits in the top 6.5% nationally. Modeled mobility disability stands in the top 7.5% nationally, and energy burden resides in the top 6.3% nationally. Modeled fair or poor health sits in the top 10.2% nationally, and pfas stands in the top 9.8% nationally.
Placed beside its immediate neighbors, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put plainly, 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. Energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. A healthier nearby ZIP overall is ZIP 48610, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 89%
14%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 96%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 44%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 4%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 6%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 8%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 6%
8%
Disability
healthier than 6%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 86%
14%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 92%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 58%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 2%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 6%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 12%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 6%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 7%
8%
Disability
healthier than 4%
7%
“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
48610
Michiganshares a border
Score 43.66
Closest healthier
48635
Michiganshares a border
Score 44.62
Similar health profile
24312
Virginia100% similar profile
Score 40.20
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 | 39.6% | 35.6–43.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 45.5% | 40.9–50.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.9% | 9.8–11.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.6% | 11.1–14.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 11.3% | 10.1–12.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 14.9% | 13.3–16.6 |
| Depression among adults | 29.4% | 25.2–33.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 17.3% | 15.1–19.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 40.2% | 35.6–44.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 42.8% | 34.5–51.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.7% | 5.2–6.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 22.1% | 18.4–26.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.0% | 7.6–10.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.4% | 77.5–83.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.6% | 77.1–83.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.9% | 84.1–87.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.3% | 60.8–71.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 55.6% | 51.6–59.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.4% | 62.8–78.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.9% | 11.3–16.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 23.5% | 20.4–26.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 34.3% | 29.0–39.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.9% | 32.7–47.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 29.1% | 25.6–32.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.1% | 17.9–22.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 20.2% | 17.8–22.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 19.1% | 16.9–21.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 42.9% | 37.7–47.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.5% | 10.3–12.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 13.1% | 11.7–14.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 22.7% | 19.9–25.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.7% | 6.0–7.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.0% | 7.2–8.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.9% | 20.2–27.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 22.3% | 19.1–25.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 24.9% | 21.7–28.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.5% | 12.4–16.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.2% | 9.8–12.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.3% | 27.1–37.5 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 11.7% | 10.2–13.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 24.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 13.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 15.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 8.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 83.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 22.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 87.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 61.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 26.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 51.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $46,008 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $81,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $804 | $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 | 72.9 yr ± 0.72 | 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 0.72 years of 72.9, 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