ZIP code
49055
in Gobles, MichiganPopulation 5,941
47.59/ 100
Ranked #19,454 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 39%)
Ranked #654 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (bottom 33%)
Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.
The read
Gobles, Michigan (ZIP 49055) ranks in the bottom 39% nationally (19,454th) and the bottom 33% of Michigan (654th).
A profile of give and take, with clear readings each way: modeled loud transportation noise settles at the national minimum, shared with about 22% of ZIPs. Modeled colon screening rests in the top 11.9% nationally, and floodplain exposure lands in the bottom 16% nationally. Outer-floodplain exposure settles at the national minimum, shared with about 36% of ZIPs. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility rests in the top 24% nationally, modeled air-toxics cancer risk lands in the bottom 25% nationally, and modeled short sleep settles in the bottom 29% nationally. On the other side, distance to a Superfund site rests in the bottom 19% nationally, modeled pfas lands in the top 19% nationally, and modeled obesity settles in the top 28% nationally.
Against its neighbors, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. 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 hazardous-chemical facility is a plant handling large amounts of hazardous chemicals that must file an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 49009, 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 79%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 77%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 84%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 50%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 42%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 26%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 36%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 12%
8%
Disability
healthier than 34%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 72%
14%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 40%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 47%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 42%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 48%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 26%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 24%
8%
Disability
healthier than 26%
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 78.4; chronic-disease standing 26.4 — 52 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #2,337 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
49009
Michiganshares a border
Score 58.25
Closest healthier
49010
Michiganshares a border
Score 50.07
Similar health profile
49340
Michigan98% similar profile
Score 46.71
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 | 34.4% | 31.0–38.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 39.3% | 35.4–43.5 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.1% | 9.2–11.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.0% | 10.7–13.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.3% | 7.4–9.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.6% | 9.3–11.9 |
| Depression among adults | 28.4% | 24.8–32.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 13.7% | 11.9–15.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.2% | 34.1–42.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.5% | 32.7–46.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.2% | 3.8–4.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 12.6% | 10.3–15.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.4% | 6.1–8.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.9% | 76.1–81.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.5% | 77.5–83.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.4% | 85.8–88.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 71.7% | 67.2–76.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 64.9% | 61.6–68.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.9% | 68.9–82.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.4% | 12.9–18.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.8% | 15.2–20.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 27.9% | 23.7–32.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.2% | 27.6–39.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.1% | 19.3–25.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.7% | 16.6–20.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.5% | 14.6–18.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.2% | 14.3–18.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 35.1% | 30.9–39.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.7% | 7.8–9.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 16.9% | 14.7–19.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.6% | 4.1–5.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.6% | 5.0–6.2 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 22.1% | 19.0–25.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.7% | 13.3–18.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 15.8% | 13.5–18.2 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.4% | 9.7–13.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.3% | 7.3–9.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.2% | 26.8–36.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.7% | 7.5–9.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 14.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 19.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 6.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 89.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 83.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 54.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 20.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 44.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $62,083 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $163,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $888 | $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 | 79.4 yr ± 0.83 | 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 0.83 years of 79.4, 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