ZIP code
49659
in Mancelona, MichiganPopulation 7,140
48.60/ 100
Ranked #18,192 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 43%)
Ranked #596 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (bottom 39%)
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.
Distance to a Superfund site
In this ZIP
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Park land
23.8%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
1.3%
in the bottom 9.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms 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 ›Tree cover
63.4%
in the top 12.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS87thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›The read
Mancelona, Michigan (ZIP 49659), in overall standing, comes out in the bottom 43% nationally (18,192nd) and the bottom 39% of Michigan (596th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
A few readings each way define this mixed profile: park land sits in the top 5.9% nationally, modeled arsenic stands in the bottom 9.1% nationally, and elder services resides in the top 10.1% nationally. Modeled tree cover sits in the top 12.9% nationally, modeled humid heat stands in the bottom 18% nationally, and distance to a hazardous-chemical facility resides in the top 18% nationally. Pulling the other way, distance to a Superfund site sits at the national minimum. Recreation stands at the national minimum, shared with about 35% of ZIPs. Modeled expected annual loss resides in the top 22% nationally, and pfas sits in the top 22% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, 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. The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 49611, 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 89%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 64%
13%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 97%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 48%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 54%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 34%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 29%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 14%
8%
Disability
healthier than 39%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 85%
14%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 93%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 35%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 30%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 28%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 39%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 33%
8%
Disability
healthier than 35%
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
49611
Michiganshares a border
Score 48.72
Closest healthier
49612
Michiganshares a border
Score 56.14
Similar health profile
49338
Michigan99% similar profile
Score 47.59
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 | 32.7% | 29.8–35.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 38.3% | 34.8–41.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.0% | 9.2–10.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.8% | 10.6–12.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.1% | 7.4–8.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.0% | 8.9–11.0 |
| Depression among adults | 27.7% | 24.5–31.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.7% | 11.2–14.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.5% | 33.9–40.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 38.6% | 31.8–45.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.0% | 3.7–4.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 12.7% | 10.7–15.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.1% | 6.0–8.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.9% | 75.5–80.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.6% | 76.7–82.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.6% | 85.0–88.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.0% | 64.8–72.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 65.0% | 61.9–68.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.1% | 67.7–79.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.2% | 13.8–18.7 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.5% | 15.4–19.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 26.0% | 22.3–29.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.1% | 28.7–39.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 21.0% | 18.7–23.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.6% | 16.8–20.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.7% | 14.1–17.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.9% | 14.3–17.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.0% | 30.4–37.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.7% | 7.8–9.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.5% | 8.6–10.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.8% | 14.1–17.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.3% | 3.9–4.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.2% | 4.8–5.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.1% | 20.0–26.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.8% | 12.8–17.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 14.4% | 12.4–16.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.9% | 9.4–12.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.0% | 7.1–9.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.9% | 27.6–36.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.1% | 7.1–9.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 12.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 17.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 85.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 17.5% | 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) | 1.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 58.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 21.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 43.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $62,308 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $168,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $856 | $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 | 78.4 yr ± 0.82 | 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 0.82 years of 78.4, 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