ZIP code
49286
in Tecumseh, MichiganPopulation 14,128
52.53/ 100
Ranked #12,718 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 40%)
Ranked #388 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (top 40%)
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.
Radon
3.5 pCi/L
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The modeled typical indoor radon level for this area, in picocuries per liter — the EPA recommends fixing a home at 4 pCi/L or above.
Modeled from indoor-radon measurements. In Alaska and Hawaii, where those measurements are not published, a US Geological Survey geologic radon-potential category stands in — a coarser input, disclosed rather than hidden.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 11.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS89thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Fiber broadband
78.4%
in the top 25% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS75thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›The read
Tecumseh, Michigan (ZIP 49286), by its overall standing, sits in the top 40% healthiest ZIPs nationally (12,718th) and the top 40% of Michigan (388th).
Both sides of the picture show up plainly in this area's numbers: distance to an emergency room resides in the bottom 12.7% nationally, physicians rests in the top 16% nationally, and lithium in drinking water lies in the bottom 16% nationally. Pharmacy sits in the top 17% nationally, modeled mammography settles in the top 15% nationally, and elder services registers in the top 21% nationally. By contrast, modeled radon stands in the top 4.8% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden lands in the top 11.4% nationally. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility is at the national minimum, shared with about 31% of ZIPs. Modeled expected annual loss resides in the top 19% nationally.
Held up against its neighbors, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, radon is a radioactive soil gas the EPA identifies as the top cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. 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 nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 48176, 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
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 65%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 85%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 61%
11%
Disability
healthier than 61%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 79%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 45%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 35%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 20%
8%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 69%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 65%
13%
Disability
healthier than 63%
7%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 53%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 57%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 53%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 49%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 23%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 39%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
48176
Michiganshares a border
Score 66.35
Closest healthier
49236
Michiganshares a border
Score 54.84
Similar health profile
48473
Michigan99% similar profile
Score 51.93
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 | 30.6% | 27.4–34.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.4% | 33.5–41.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.4% | 9.5–11.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.4% | 10.2–12.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.3% | 7.3–9.3 |
| Depression among adults | 27.6% | 24.0–31.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.7% | 10.2–13.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.3% | 34.1–42.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.2% | 32.6–46.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–3.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.7% | 8.8–13.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.2% | 5.2–7.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.2% | 75.2–80.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.6% | 76.2–82.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.4% | 86.9–89.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.1% | 65.8–74.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.9% | 67.9–73.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.3% | 72.9–84.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.2% | 13.4–19.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 14.3% | 12.3–16.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.2% | 20.5–28.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.1% | 29.9–40.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 18.3% | 15.9–20.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.4% | 15.6–19.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.3% | 12.7–16.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.0% | 12.4–15.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.4% | 27.6–35.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.0% | 7.1–8.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.1% | 7.2–9.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.9% | 12.1–15.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.5% | 3.2–3.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.4% | 4.0–4.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.4% | 18.0–24.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.6% | 9.7–13.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.6% | 9.0–12.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.2% | 7.8–10.7 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.6% | 5.8–7.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.9% | 26.1–35.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.6% | 5.7–7.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 28.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 90.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 24.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 79.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 49.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 21.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 40.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $72,429 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $238,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $1,008 | $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 | 78.9 yr ± 0.64 | 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 0.64 years of 78.9, 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