Skip to main content
ZipVitals

ZIP code

49459

in Walkerville, MichiganPopulation 1,524

41.46/ 100

Ranked #25,702 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 20%)

Ranked #884 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (bottom 9.2%)

Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.

Robust across all 9 health domains

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.

Floodplain exposure

0.00%

at the national minimum

Lower is healthier

ST1st
US1st
Definition & 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 ›

Crowded housing

10.9%

in the top 4.0% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST99th
US96th
Definition & source ›

The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.

Full methodology ›

Unemployment rate

14.3%

in the top 4.3% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST97th
US96th
Definition & source ›

The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.

Full methodology ›

Park land

32.3%

in the top 4.4% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST94th
US96th
Definition & source ›

The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.

Full methodology ›

Child-care access

0.69 per 1,000 residents

in the top 5.3% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST97th
US95th
Definition & source ›

The number of child day-care services inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.

Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.

Full methodology ›

Home broadband subscription

73.1%

in the bottom 8.2% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST3rd
US8th
Definition & source ›

The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.

Full methodology ›

Energy-cost burden

5.2%

in the top 7.1% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST94th
US93rd
Definition & 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 ›

Transportation noise

0.21%

in the bottom 10.7% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST4th
US11th
Definition & source ›

The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.

Full methodology ›

Obesity

42.3%

in the top 11.7% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST92nd
US88th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.

Full methodology ›

Slow internet speeds

0.54%

in the top 19% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST91st
US81st
Definition & source ›

The share of homes whose fastest available download speed is under 10 Mbps.

Full methodology ›

The read

Walkerville, Michigan (ZIP 49459) ranks in the bottom 20% nationally (25,702nd) and the bottom 9.2% of Michigan (884th).

continue reading

Several signals sit on each side of the ledger here: floodplain exposure rests at the national minimum, and park land lands in the top 4.4% nationally. Childcare settles in the top 5.3% nationally, and modeled transportation noise rests in the bottom 10.7% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise lands at the national minimum, shared with about 22% of ZIPs. Working the other way, crowded housing settles in the top 4.0% nationally, unemployment rests in the top 4.3% nationally, and home broadband subscription lands in the bottom 8.2% nationally. Modeled energy burden settles in the top 7.1% nationally, and obesity rests in the top 11.7% nationally.

Against its neighbors, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, floodplain exposure is land with about a 1-in-100 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "100-year floodplain". Energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. Transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier 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.

Compare within

Lifting this score

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 96%

14%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 97%

5%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 20%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 6%

16%

Preventive Care

healthier than 37%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 28%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 11%

8%

Disability

healthier than 20%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 14%

5%

Lifting this score

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 94%

14%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 94%

5%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 17%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 6%

16%

Preventive Care

healthier than 8%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 15%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 21%

8%

Disability

healthier than 11%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 9%

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 ›

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 95.6 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 20.0 — 76 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.

    Ranked #728 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.

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
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Arthritis among adults33.2%30.0–36.4
High blood pressure among adults39.7%35.8–43.4
Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults9.2%8.4–10.0
Current asthma among adults11.9%10.6–13.2
Coronary heart disease among adults9.1%8.1–10.0
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults11.3%9.9–13.0
Depression among adults27.7%24.3–31.2
Diagnosed diabetes among adults14.6%12.9–16.4
High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened37.7%33.7–41.5
Obesity among adults42.3%34.5–49.4
Stroke among adults4.6%4.1–5.0
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years17.5%14.5–20.8
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years10.2%8.5–12.1
Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure78.2%75.5–80.7
Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults78.2%74.9–81.2
Cholesterol screening among adults85.0%83.2–86.9
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years65.8%61.2–70.2
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults60.8%57.3–64.2
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years72.2%64.5–79.2
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Binge drinking among adults15.6%13.1–18.2
Current cigarette smoking among adults20.4%17.4–23.5
No leisure-time physical activity among adults31.1%26.5–35.7
Short sleep duration among adults33.9%28.0–40.2
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults25.5%22.3–29.0
Frequent mental distress among adults19.4%17.4–21.4
Frequent physical distress among adults17.8%15.8–20.0
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Cognitive disability among adults17.8%15.8–20.0
Any disability among adults38.1%33.8–42.6
Hearing disability among adults9.6%8.6–10.6
Independent living disability among adults11.1%9.8–12.6
Mobility disability among adults18.6%16.2–21.2
Self-care disability among adults5.3%4.7–6.1
Vision disability among adults6.9%6.1–7.7
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Lack of social and emotional support among adults24.0%20.6–27.6
Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults20.4%17.4–23.8
Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults20.4%17.3–23.8
Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults14.3%12.3–16.6
Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults10.3%9.0–11.7
Loneliness among adults32.7%28.0–37.5
Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults10.7%9.3–12.2
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)MI median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate20.9%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,36410.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974
Uninsured 18–647.8%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,2866.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975
No HS diploma (25+)13.6%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,5056.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974
Bachelor's or higher (25+)15.8%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50522.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974
Unemployment rate (16+)14.3%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2744.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974
Households without a vehicle9.4%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3224.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973
Broadband subscription73.1%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32288.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)20.7%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32222.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973
Homeownership rate86.8%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32285.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973
Crowded housing (>1 per room)10.9%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3221.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973
Foreign-born population6.8%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,5531.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975
Single-parent households50.8%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08756.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970
Population 65+17.3%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55320.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975
Median age42.0 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29243.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974
Median household income$55,806$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962
Median home value$108,300$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952
Median gross rent$867$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$972 ($719–$1,368) n=849
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)MI median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy at birth77.9 yr ± 1.8978.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,30878.6 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 1.89 years of 77.9, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.

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