ZIP code
49621
in Cedar, MichiganPopulation 3,483
61.76/ 100
Ranked #3,663 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 11.5%)
Ranked #89 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (top 9.2%)
Ranked #7 of 28 Traverse City, MI ZIPs (top 25%)
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.
Colon-cancer screening
76%
in the top 1.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
0.8 mi
in the bottom 6.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST9thUS7thDefinition & 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 ›Housing insecurity
6.9%
in the bottom 6.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
5.0%
in the bottom 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
29.8%
in the bottom 8.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
8.4%
in the bottom 9.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
5.9%
in the bottom 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
28.4%
in the bottom 9.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Recreation access
0.95 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS90thDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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 ›Cognitive disability
11.2%
in the bottom 11.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS11thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›The read
Cedar, Michigan (ZIP 49621), by its overall standing, sits in the top 11.5% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,663rd) and the top 9.2% of Michigan (89th).
The data is generous to this ZIP in several places worth naming: modeled colon screening settles in the top 1.8% nationally, housing insecurity registers in the bottom 6.7% nationally, and transportation stands in the bottom 7.6% nationally. Modeled short sleep lands in the bottom 8.8% nationally, food insecurity is in the bottom 9.2% nationally, and tooth loss resides in the bottom 4.4% nationally. Modeled loneliness rests in the bottom 9.6% nationally, and recreation lies in the top 9.8% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise sits at the national minimum, shared with about 22% of ZIPs. Working the other way, distance to a Superfund site settles in the bottom 6.6% nationally.
Held up against its neighbors, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 49630, about 2.8 miles away. Looking wider, the ZIP also sits on the healthier half of the national range on at least seven of the ten good-life measures tracked here, from quiet and green space to nearby care, a combination reached by about one in twenty-five US ZIP codes.
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. Compare it against the US, this state and the Traverse City, MI metro area.
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 84%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 86%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 98%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 90%
11%
Disability
healthier than 81%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 76%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 70%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 56%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 58%
8%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 66%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 86%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 81%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 96%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 92%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 89%
8%
Disability
healthier than 85%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 73%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 31%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 85%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 62%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 69%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 69%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 69%
8%
Disability
in the top 0.00%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 85%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 31%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 23%
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
49653
Michiganshares a border
Score 61.59
Closest healthier
49630
Michiganabout 2.8 mi away
Score 63.78
Similar health profile
02045
Massachusetts99% similar profile
Score 64.11
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 | 32.8% | 28.7–36.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.7% | 32.1–41.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 11.7% | 10.5–13.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.9% | 9.5–12.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.2% | 6.3–8.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.3% | 6.1–8.6 |
| Depression among adults | 25.1% | 21.2–29.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.1% | 9.4–12.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.2% | 33.4–43.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 32.5% | 24.6–40.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.4% | 3.0–3.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 5.9% | 4.6–7.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 4.4% | 3.4–5.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.5% | 77.3–83.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 82.7% | 79.2–85.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 91.3% | 89.9–92.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 76.0% | 71.7–80.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 76.2% | 73.4–79.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.9% | 71.9–84.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.9% | 12.9–19.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.5% | 9.2–13.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 19.6% | 15.8–23.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 29.8% | 23.9–36.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.2% | 12.7–17.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.5% | 12.6–16.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.8% | 11.0–14.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.2% | 9.5–12.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.6% | 23.4–31.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.7% | 6.7–8.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.6% | 5.7–7.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.5% | 10.5–14.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.0% | 2.6–3.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.6% | 3.2–4.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 18.9% | 16.0–22.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.4% | 6.7–10.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.5% | 5.9–9.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.9% | 5.6–8.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.0% | 4.2–5.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.4% | 24.0–34.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.1% | 4.3–6.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 6.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 42.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 18.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 91.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.2% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 64.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 29.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 50.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $95,446 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $396,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $1,012 | $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 | 81.9 yr ± 0.77 | 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 0.77 years of 81.9, 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