ZIP code
49015
in Battle Creek, MichiganPopulation 27,765
50.55/ 100
Ranked #15,489 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 48%)
Ranked #465 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (top 48%)
Ranked #5 of 12 Battle Creek, MI ZIPs (top 42%)
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
72.8%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
468 units
in the top 4.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 14.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS85thDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
93.4%
in the top 18% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS82ndDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFAS — man-made “forever chemicals” that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down — were detected in EPA testing.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, ZIP 49015, one of several in Battle Creek, Michigan lands in the top 48% healthiest ZIPs nationally (15,489th) and the top 48% of Michigan (465th).
A handful of measures stand out most sharply across the profile here: subsidized affordable housing is in the top 4.9% nationally. Distance to a community health center settles at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Physicians resides in the top 12.0% nationally, mental-health providers registers in the top 14.8% nationally, and dental providers rests in the top 16% nationally. On the other side, modeled pfas stands in the top 3.7% nationally, distance to a Superfund site lies in the bottom 14.2% nationally, and modeled disaster risk lands in the top 14.9% nationally. Modeled expected annual loss sits in the top 16% nationally, and PFAS in drinking water is in the top 18% nationally.
Set beside the nearby areas, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A note on the terms: 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. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 49034, just across the boundary, ranks better 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. Compare it against the US, this state and the Battle Creek, MI metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 69%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 62%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 77%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 85%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 44%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 57%
16%
Disability
healthier than 44%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 25%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 22%
8%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 62%
16%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 51%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 60%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 57%
8%
Disability
healthier than 41%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 36%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 32%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 91%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 82%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 73%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 64%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 64%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 45%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 55%
11%
Disability
healthier than 45%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
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 ›
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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 77.5 ± 1.1 years. A median household income of $68,821 predicts 78.6 years — 1.1 years below.
Ranked #1,505 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
49014
Michiganshares a border
Score 46.43
Closest healthier
49034
Michiganshares a border
Score 52.69
Similar health profile
48446
Michigan96% similar profile
Score 49.63
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 | 30.3% | 27.2–33.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 38.0% | 34.2–41.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.1% | 8.3–9.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.6% | 10.4–12.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.1% | 6.4–7.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.7% | 7.8–9.7 |
| Depression among adults | 26.3% | 22.9–29.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.7% | 11.1–14.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.7% | 32.7–40.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 40.8% | 34.3–47.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.8% | 3.5–4.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.9% | 9.7–14.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.9% | 6.8–9.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.4% | 74.6–79.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.0% | 76.8–83.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.6% | 84.9–88.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.5% | 64.0–72.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 66.8% | 63.4–70.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 76.7% | 69.8–82.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.5% | 12.0–17.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.1% | 14.1–18.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 27.1% | 23.3–31.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.8% | 28.4–39.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.2% | 17.9–22.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.0% | 16.1–19.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.5% | 12.9–16.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.4% | 13.8–17.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 33.7% | 29.8–37.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.8% | 6.9–8.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.5% | 8.6–10.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.1% | 13.3–16.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.2% | 3.8–4.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.6% | 5.1–6.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.8% | 20.4–27.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.7% | 15.5–20.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 17.5% | 15.5–19.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.0% | 11.4–14.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.2% | 8.2–10.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.4% | 28.5–38.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.8% | 8.6–11.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 27.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.8% | 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) | 28.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 72.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.8% | 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 | 50.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 18.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 39.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $68,821 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $184,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $1,006 | $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 | 77.5 yr ± 0.54 | 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 0.54 years of 77.5, 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