ZIP code
49630
in Empire, MichiganPopulation 1,390
63.78/ 100
Ranked #2,583 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 8.1%)
Ranked #60 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (top 6.2%)
Ranked #5 of 28 Traverse City, MI ZIPs (top 18%)
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
80%
in the top 0.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
5.2%
in the bottom 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
25.9%
in the bottom 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
4.1%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
6.8%
in the bottom 3.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
4.0%
in the bottom 3.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
28.1%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
9.5%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
14.9 per million
in the bottom 6.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST13thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Fatal road crashes
36 per 100,000 residents per year
in the top 9.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›The read
Empire, Michigan (ZIP 49630) ranks in the top 8.1% healthiest ZIPs nationally (2,583rd) and the top 6.2% of Michigan (60th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
A profile of give and take, with clear readings each way: modeled colon screening resides in the top 0.3% nationally, and housing insecurity stands in the bottom 0.9% nationally. Modeled loneliness sits in the bottom 1.0% nationally, and transportation resides in the bottom 1.9% nationally. Modeled food insecurity stands in the bottom 3.1% nationally, utility shutoff sits in the bottom 3.8% nationally, and short sleep resides in the bottom 3.3% nationally. Modeled cognitive disability stands in the bottom 3.3% nationally, and air-toxics cancer risk sits in the bottom 6.1% nationally. On the other side, fatal road crashes resides in the top 9.0% nationally.
Against its neighbors, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 49636, 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. 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 90%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 97%
14%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.3%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 98%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 86%
8%
Disability
healthier than 77%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the top 0.4%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 27%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 20%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 92%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 95%
14%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.4%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 98%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 96%
8%
Disability
healthier than 80%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 26%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 14%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 74%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 88%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 89%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 87%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 88%
8%
Disability
healthier than 77%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 21%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 24%
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
49636
Michiganshares a border
Score 66.45
Closest healthier
49654
Michiganabout 3.9 mi away
Score 64.05
Similar health profile
02633
Massachusetts99% similar profile
Score 66.47
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 | 38.7% | 34.5–42.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 42.3% | 37.4–47.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 15.2% | 13.9–16.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.7% | 7.6–9.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.1% | 6.8–9.5 |
| Depression among adults | 22.9% | 19.3–26.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.7% | 10.8–14.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 43.1% | 38.1–47.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 31.3% | 23.9–39.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.0% | 3.5–4.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.7% | 7.1–10.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 3.7% | 2.9–4.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 84.7% | 81.8–87.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 86.2% | 83.6–88.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 93.9% | 92.9–94.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 80.0% | 76.1–83.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 76.7% | 73.9–79.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.0% | 73.4–85.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.8% | 10.4–15.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.7% | 7.8–11.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 19.6% | 15.8–23.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 28.1% | 22.5–34.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.2% | 12.8–17.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 12.1% | 10.5–13.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.0% | 11.3–14.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 9.5% | 8.2–11.0 |
| Any disability among adults | 28.8% | 24.5–33.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.2% | 8.0–10.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.4% | 5.5–7.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.0% | 11.8–16.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.7–3.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.2–4.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 16.7% | 14.1–20.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.8% | 5.4–8.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.2% | 4.8–7.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 5.2% | 4.2–6.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.1% | 3.5–4.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 25.9% | 22.0–31.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.0% | 3.4–4.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 0.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 58.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 15.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 86.3% | 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 | 0.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 74.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 47.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 64.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $106,375 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $497,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $1,083 | $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 unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
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