ZIP code
49749
in Indian River, MichiganPopulation 4,411
50.48/ 100
Ranked #15,590 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 49%)
Ranked #472 of 973 Michigan ZIPs (top 49%)
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.
Park land
35.8%
in the top 3.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
19.6 per million
in the bottom 7.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST16thUS7thDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS8thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility
13.6 mi
in the top 9.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST87thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Physician access
1.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ offices located 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 ›The read
By the composite health measure, Indian River, Michigan (ZIP 49749) ranks in the top 49% healthiest ZIPs nationally (15,590th) and the top 49% of Michigan (472nd).
A handful of measures stand out most sharply across the profile here: park land rests in the top 3.8% nationally, and modeled air-toxics cancer risk stands in the bottom 7.5% nationally. Modeled industrial-pollution burden lies in the bottom 7.7% nationally, and distance to a hazardous-chemical facility lands in the top 9.3% nationally. Physicians sits in the top 9.3% nationally. Modeled extreme heat is at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Modeled disaster risk settles in the bottom 10.8% nationally. Distance to a community health center resides at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. On the other side, distance to a nursing home registers in the top 13.9% nationally, and modeled pfas rests in the top 14.2% nationally.
Read against the ZIPs closest to it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To spell things out, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. 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. Close by, ZIP 49706, just across the boundary, ranks healthier overall.
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
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 71%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 92%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 90%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 70%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 66%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 44%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 17%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 30%
8%
Disability
healthier than 33%
7%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 75%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 90%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 75%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 70%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 68%
8%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 42%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 13%
21%
Disability
healthier than 25%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 16%
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 92.4 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 16.7 — 76 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #725 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.
Nearby
49705
Michiganshares a border
Score 44.06
Closest healthier
49706
Michiganshares a border
Score 53.18
Similar health profile
28743
North Carolina98% similar profile
Score 50.34
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 | 36.7% | 32.9–40.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 42.4% | 37.9–46.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 12.2% | 11.0–13.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.5% | 10.2–12.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.5% | 8.5–10.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.8% | 9.4–12.2 |
| Depression among adults | 26.6% | 22.8–30.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.4% | 12.4–16.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 40.5% | 35.9–45.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 40.5% | 32.4–48.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.6% | 4.2–5.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.0% | 8.8–13.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.5% | 5.5–7.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 81.8% | 78.9–84.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 82.5% | 79.2–85.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.0% | 87.5–90.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.5% | 65.5–75.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 69.4% | 65.8–72.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.1% | 69.5–83.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.3% | 11.6–17.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.2% | 13.8–18.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 26.1% | 21.8–30.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.2% | 25.9–39.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 21.3% | 18.5–24.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.7% | 14.7–18.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.1% | 14.1–18.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.6% | 12.8–16.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 35.4% | 31.0–39.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.1% | 8.9–11.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.5% | 8.3–10.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.7% | 15.2–20.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.0–5.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.3% | 18.1–24.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.6% | 11.5–15.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 13.7% | 11.5–15.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.6% | 8.1–11.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.3% | 6.4–8.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.8% | 25.0–34.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.3% | 6.3–8.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 11.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.7% (4.3–22.3%) n=974 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.8% (2.5–13.5%) n=975 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.7% (2.5–14.2%) n=974 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 37.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (11.4–48.3%) n=974 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.6% (1.3–10.0%) n=974 |
| Households without a vehicle | 6.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.9–10.8%) n=973 |
| Broadband subscription | 88.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (79.5–95.5%) n=973 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (14.8–32.9%) n=973 |
| Homeownership rate | 88.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 85.3% (62.2–94.6%) n=973 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.6%) n=973 |
| Foreign-born population | 2.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.8% (0.3–10.0%) n=975 |
| Single-parent households | 77.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.5% (43.6–74.2%) n=970 |
| Population 65+ | 38.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.5% (13.7–35.2%) n=975 |
| Median age | 60.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 43.6 yr (35.2–58.2) n=974 |
| Median household income | $65,608 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $68,216 ($47,282–$105,129) n=962 |
| Median home value | $244,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $192,350 ($116,360–$355,650) n=952 |
| Median gross rent | $950 | $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 | 81.1 yr ± 1.02 | 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 1.02 years of 81.1, 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