ZIP code
49013
in Bangor, MichiganPopulation 5,346
41.50/ 100
Ranked #25,655 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 20%)
Ranked #883 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (bottom 9.3%)
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.
Crowded housing
5.5%
in the top 12.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS88thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Poverty rate
23.4%
in the top 12.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS87thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
11.8%
in the top 12.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS88thDefinition & 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 ›Food insecurity
23.2%
in the top 13.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS86thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
12.1%
in the top 13.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS86thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
18.9%
in the top 14.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS85thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
11.6%
in the top 15.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS85thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Obesity
42.1%
in the top 12.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS88thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
16.5%
in the top 16% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS84thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
26.5%
in the top 17% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS83rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite health measure, Bangor, Michigan (ZIP 49013) ranks in the bottom 20% nationally (25,655th) and the bottom 9.3% of Michigan (883rd).
The picture here is genuinely mixed, with readings on both sides: distance to a community health center is at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. On the other side, crowded housing settles in the top 12.1% nationally, and poverty resides in the top 12.7% nationally. Modeled independent living disability registers in the top 12.5% nationally, food insecurity rests in the top 13.7% nationally, and utility shutoff stands in the top 13.8% nationally. Modeled cognitive disability lies in the top 14.6% nationally, transportation lands in the top 15.0% nationally, and obesity sits in the top 12.5% nationally. Modeled housing insecurity is in the top 16% nationally.
Read against the ZIPs closest to it, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To spell things out, distance to a community health center is a federally funded (HRSA) community health center serving everyone regardless of ability to pay. Close by, ZIP 49026, just across the boundary, ranks 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 88%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 80%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 60%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 24%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 11%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 30%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 25%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 7%
8%
Disability
healthier than 17%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 84%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 63%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 42%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 22%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 10%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 6%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 14%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 9%
8%
Disability
healthier than 10%
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 ›
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 88.2; chronic-disease standing 24.2 — 64 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #1,453 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
49026
Michiganshares a border
Score 42.32
Closest healthier
49064
Michiganshares a border
Score 42.54
Similar health profile
04929
Maine99% similar profile
Score 32.39
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 | 32.4% | 29.1–35.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 38.7% | 34.7–43.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.5% | 7.7–9.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.3% | 10.9–13.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.2% | 7.3–9.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.0% | 9.7–12.4 |
| Depression among adults | 28.6% | 24.6–32.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.7% | 12.8–16.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.7% | 32.5–41.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 42.1% | 34.7–49.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.4% | 4.0–4.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 17.3% | 14.2–20.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.9% | 10.1–14.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.9% | 74.0–79.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.0% | 75.6–82.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.7% | 82.7–86.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 64.9% | 59.8–69.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 59.3% | 55.5–63.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.9% | 63.6–79.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.9% | 12.2–17.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 19.9% | 17.1–22.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 32.6% | 27.8–37.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.4% | 29.2–42.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 26.5% | 23.2–29.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.2% | 17.9–22.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.8% | 15.7–20.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.9% | 16.7–21.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 38.5% | 33.8–43.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.7% | 7.7–9.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.8% | 10.4–13.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 18.7% | 16.3–21.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.2% | 6.5–8.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.5% | 21.0–28.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 23.2% | 20.1–26.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 23.1% | 20.1–26.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.5% | 14.3–19.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.6% | 10.1–13.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.4% | 28.4–38.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 12.1% | 10.6–13.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 23.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 15.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 18.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 15.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.2% | 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 | 87.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 29.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 76.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 5.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 10.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 40.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 15.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 36.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $55,349 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $154,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $979 | $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 | 77.2 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 77.2, 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