ZIP code
49623
in Chase, MichiganPopulation 986
38.41/ 100
Ranked #27,775 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 13.4%)
Ranked #919 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (bottom 5.6%)
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.
Tooth loss
24.5%
in the top 7.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
5.4%
in the top 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility
15 mi
in the top 8.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST89thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest facility that handles enough hazardous chemicals to require an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
10.2%
in the top 8.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
68.6%
in the top 9.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
12.2%
in the top 10.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS90thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 10.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS11thDefinition & 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 ›Recreation access
0.84 per 1,000 residents
in the top 12.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS88thDefinition & 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 ›Self-care disability
6.0%
in the top 12.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS88thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
20.6%
in the top 14.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS85thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›The read
In overall standing, Chase, Michigan (ZIP 49623) comes out in the bottom 13.4% nationally (27,775th) and the bottom 5.6% of Michigan (919th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
Both sides of the picture show up plainly in this area's numbers: distance to a hazardous-chemical facility lies in the top 8.0% nationally, modeled tree cover sits in the top 9.9% nationally, and park land settles in the top 10.1% nationally. Modeled industrial-pollution burden registers in the bottom 10.7% nationally, and recreation stands in the top 12.5% nationally. By contrast, modeled tooth loss lands in the top 7.9% nationally, and energy burden is in the top 6.0% nationally. Modeled coronary heart disease resides in the top 8.3% nationally, and independent living disability rests in the top 10.3% nationally. Modeled stroke lies in the top 11.3% nationally.
Relative to the ZIPs around it, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain terms, 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. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. The nearest 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 94%
14%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 96%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 44%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 50%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 9%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 8%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 16%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 8%
8%
Disability
healthier than 12%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 92%
14%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 89%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 6%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 7%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 11%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 10%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 11%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
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
49304
Michiganshares a border
Score 36.99
Closest healthier
49309
Michiganshares a border
Score 42.68
Similar health profile
04965
Maine99% similar profile
Score 32.44
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 | 36.6% | 32.8–40.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 42.7% | 38.2–47.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.3% | 9.2–11.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.3% | 10.8–13.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.2% | 9.0–11.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 13.3% | 11.4–15.4 |
| Depression among adults | 28.9% | 24.8–33.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.3% | 13.2–17.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.9% | 34.3–43.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.2% | 31.2–47.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.2% | 4.6–5.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 24.5% | 20.3–29.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.1% | 7.0–11.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.1% | 76.1–81.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.9% | 76.2–83.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.6% | 83.5–87.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.0% | 57.8–68.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 60.6% | 56.6–64.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 73.7% | 65.5–81.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.7% | 12.8–18.7 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 22.0% | 18.4–25.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 32.5% | 27.2–38.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.3% | 28.4–42.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 26.9% | 23.0–31.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.7% | 17.4–22.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 19.0% | 16.5–21.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.5% | 16.0–21.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 39.8% | 34.4–45.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.2% | 10.5–14.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 20.6% | 17.6–23.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.0% | 5.2–6.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.4–8.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.6% | 20.8–28.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 20.4% | 16.5–24.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 21.6% | 17.6–25.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.7% | 11.3–16.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.4% | 8.8–12.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.2% | 28.2–38.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.6% | 9.0–12.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 21.1% | 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+) | 8.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 11.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.0% | 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 | 82.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 26.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 89.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 76.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 25.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 53.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $60,147 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $132,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $725 | $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 | 80.8 yr ± 1.54 | 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 1.54 years of 80.8, 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