ZIP code
49304
in Baldwin, MichiganPopulation 5,408
36.99/ 100
Ranked #28,532 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 11.1%)
Ranked #926 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (bottom 4.9%)
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.
Distance to a Superfund site
In this ZIP
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Superfund site — an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has listed for cleanup.
Full methodology ›Park land
36.4%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
5.7%
in the top 3.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Self-care disability
6.9%
in the top 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
30.6%
in the top 7.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
10.7%
in the top 5.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Stroke
5.6%
in the top 6.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
1.2%
in the bottom 6.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
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 ›PFAS in drinking water
62.4%
in the top 7.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Diabetes
18.2%
in the top 7.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›The read
Baldwin, Michigan (ZIP 49304), in overall standing, comes out in the bottom 11.1% nationally (28,532nd) and the bottom 4.9% of Michigan (926th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
A demanding profile, and several measures drive it: distance to a Superfund site stands at the national minimum, modeled energy burden resides in the top 3.8% nationally, and modeled self-care disability sits in the top 6.3% nationally. Modeled fair or poor health stands in the top 7.3% nationally, coronary heart disease resides in the top 5.6% nationally, and stroke sits in the top 6.9% nationally. Modeled pfas stands in the top 7.0% nationally, and diabetes resides in the top 7.5% nationally. On the stronger side, park land sits in the top 3.7% nationally, and modeled arsenic stands in the bottom 6.9% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. 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. The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 49309, 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 87%
14%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 95%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 69%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 7%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 6%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 25%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 8%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 28%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 82%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 66%
8%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 88%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 72%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 5%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 6%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 5%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 6%
11%
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
49309
Michiganshares a border
Score 42.68
Closest healthier
49402
Michiganshares a border
Score 43.49
Similar health profile
24348
Virginia99% similar profile
Score 41.03
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 | 35.9% | 32.3–39.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 45.4% | 40.8–49.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.4% | 8.5–10.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.3% | 10.0–12.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.7% | 9.7–11.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 13.4% | 12.1–15.0 |
| Depression among adults | 25.0% | 21.4–29.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 18.2% | 15.9–20.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.7% | 35.1–44.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 42.6% | 33.9–51.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.6% | 5.1–6.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 23.1% | 19.1–27.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 15.8% | 12.5–19.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.0% | 75.9–81.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.5% | 75.8–82.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.8% | 83.8–87.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.2% | 57.9–68.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 54.2% | 50.1–58.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.1% | 63.4–79.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.1% | 12.3–18.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 22.2% | 19.3–25.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 36.4% | 31.0–41.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 37.8% | 30.7–45.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 30.6% | 27.0–34.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.1% | 16.1–20.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 19.7% | 17.4–22.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.2% | 16.2–20.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 41.0% | 36.2–45.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.7% | 9.6–11.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.3% | 11.0–13.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 22.2% | 19.6–25.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.9% | 6.3–7.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.8% | 8.0–9.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 26.5% | 22.8–30.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 26.0% | 22.4–30.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 26.3% | 22.8–30.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.2% | 15.5–20.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 12.5% | 10.9–14.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.5% | 27.6–37.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 13.6% | 11.8–15.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 23.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 17.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 11.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 9.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 8.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 82.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 34.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 74.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.2% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 62.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 24.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 47.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $45,991 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $116,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $837 | $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 | 76.5 yr ± 0.92 | 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 0.92 years of 76.5, 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