ZIP code
49342
in Rodney, MichiganPopulation 1,527
50.61/ 100
Ranked #15,410 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 48%)
Ranked #462 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (top 47%)
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.
Fatal road crashes
0 per 100,000 residents per year
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
0.00%
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Nitrate in drinking water
1.3%
in the top 6.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of this area’s domestic-well groundwater at or above the federal nitrate limit of 10 milligrams 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 ›Home broadband subscription
76%
in the bottom 11.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST4thUS11thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 23% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS77thDefinition & 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 ›The read
In overall standing, Rodney, Michigan (ZIP 49342) comes out in the top 48% healthiest ZIPs nationally (15,410th) and the top 47% of Michigan (462nd).
The profile opens balanced, with readings on either hand: fatal road crashes rests at the national minimum, and floodplain exposure lies at the national minimum. Modeled loud transportation noise sits at the national minimum, shared with about 22% of ZIPs. Modeled humid heat settles in the bottom 16% nationally. Outer-floodplain exposure registers at the national minimum, shared with about 36% of ZIPs. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility stands in the top 19% nationally. By contrast, modeled nitrate lands in the top 6.1% nationally, and home broadband subscription is in the bottom 11.1% nationally. Recreation resides at the national minimum, shared with about 35% of ZIPs. Walkability rests in the bottom 18% nationally.
In plain terms, nitrate is a groundwater compound from fertilizer, manure, and sewage, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. 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. Floodplain exposure is land with about a 1-in-100 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "100-year floodplain". The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 49320, 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 93%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 79%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 96%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 58%
11%
Disability
healthier than 48%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 40%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 19%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 15%
8%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 91%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 92%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 45%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 53%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 54%
11%
Disability
healthier than 48%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 49%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 18%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 37%
8%
“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 93.2 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 39.8 — 53 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #2,231 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
49305
Michiganshares a border
Score 45.00
Closest healthier
49320
Michiganshares a border
Score 54.03
Similar health profile
48613
Michigan99% similar profile
Score 49.92
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 | 32.2% | 28.9–35.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.1% | 33.2–41.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.3% | 9.3–11.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.6% | 10.3–13.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.8% | 7.0–8.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.3% | 8.1–10.6 |
| Depression among adults | 28.3% | 24.6–32.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.7% | 10.1–13.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.6% | 32.6–40.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.1% | 29.1–43.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.9% | 3.5–4.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 15.2% | 12.4–18.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.5% | 5.3–7.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.6% | 75.9–81.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.5% | 77.2–83.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.4% | 85.6–89.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.2% | 65.5–74.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.5% | 65.0–71.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 76.5% | 68.9–82.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.3% | 13.5–19.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.8% | 13.4–18.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.5% | 21.3–30.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.2% | 27.2–39.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.7% | 17.0–22.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.8% | 15.8–20.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.9% | 13.1–16.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.0% | 13.2–17.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 33.9% | 29.6–38.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.4% | 7.5–9.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.0% | 7.9–10.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.2% | 13.1–17.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.9% | 3.4–4.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.8% | 4.3–5.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 22.1% | 18.7–25.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.2% | 10.9–15.9 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 12.8% | 10.5–15.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.0% | 8.4–11.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.3% | 6.3–8.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.9% | 27.0–37.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.4% | 6.3–8.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 13.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 22.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 76.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 23.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 83.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 56.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 21.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 43.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $53,971 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $168,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $969 | $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 | 77.0 yr ± 0.93 | 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 0.93 years of 77.0, 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