ZIP code
70601
in Lake Charles, LouisianaPopulation 30,872
33.66/ 100
Ranked #29,852 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 7.0%)
Ranked #377 of 508 Louisiana ZIPs (bottom 26%)
Ranked #21 of 25 Lake Charles, LA ZIPs (bottom 16%)
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.
Obesity
49.3%
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full 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 ›Self-care disability
7.5%
in the top 4.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
45%
in the top 3.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Outer-floodplain exposure
16%
in the top 2.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 0.2%-annual-chance flood band — the “500-year” zone, a lower but real 1-in-500 yearly chance.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Utility shut-off threat
19.8%
in the top 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Vision disability
9.7%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Mental-health provider access
0.23 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›Cross-source signals
Combined exposures in this ZIP
More than one environmental exposure stands out in this ZIP. Each is established independently and shown on its own above; they are grouped here for context — not because one causes the other.
This area ranks among the highest 10% of US ZIP codes for both flood exposure and the share of households without a vehicle.
See the full flooding, evacuation & humid-heat analysis →This area ranks among the highest 10% of US ZIP codes for both humid-heat days and flood exposure.
See the full flooding, evacuation & humid-heat analysis →
The read
Overall, ZIP 70601, one of several in Lake Charles, Louisiana places in the bottom 7.0% nationally (29,852nd) and the bottom 26% of Louisiana (377th).
The data opens on real and measurable burdens: modeled obesity settles in the top 0.9% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site sits at the national minimum. Modeled self-care disability lies in the top 4.1% nationally, and short sleep rests in the top 3.1% nationally. Outer-floodplain exposure resides in the top 2.4% nationally, modeled industrial-pollution burden is in the top 2.5% nationally, and modeled utility shutoff lands in the top 2.7% nationally. Modeled vision disability stands in the top 5.5% nationally, and disaster risk registers in the top 3.6% nationally. More encouragingly, mental-health providers settles in the top 3.3% nationally.
Beside the areas that surround it, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For readers new to these terms, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Among nearby ZIPs, the nearest healthier one overall is ZIP 70605, 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 Lake Charles, LA metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 56%
13%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 12%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 8%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 3%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 14%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 4%
5%
Lifting this score
Mental Health
healthier than 66%
8%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 48%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 27%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 27%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 18%
11%
Disability
healthier than 24%
7%
Lifting this score
Mental Health
healthier than 92%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 63%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 54%
13%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 13%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 8%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 13%
11%
Disability
healthier than 8%
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 ›
Findings that name this ZIP
2 of our published findings list 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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 72.6 ± 0.9 years. A median household income of $49,992 predicts 77.3 years — 4.8 years below.
Ranked #5,465 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 72.6 ± 0.9 years. The 50 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 76.4 years — 3.9 years below them.
Ranked #2,948 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
70605
Louisianashares a border
Score 52.72
Closest healthier
70611
Louisianashares a border
Score 50.75
Similar health profile
70538
Louisiana100% similar profile
Score 29.92
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 | 31.7% | 28.7–34.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 49.1% | 45.3–52.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.4% | 5.8–7.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.5% | 10.1–12.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.2% | 7.4–9.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.8% | 8.8–10.8 |
| Depression among adults | 25.3% | 22.0–28.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 19.3% | 17.2–21.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.7% | 34.9–42.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 49.3% | 43.5–55.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.7% | 5.3–6.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 24.1% | 20.7–28.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.3% | 8.8–12.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.9% | 77.5–82.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 83.4% | 80.6–86.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.8% | 84.0–87.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.1% | 61.8–70.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 49.2% | 45.9–53.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.6% | 72.6–84.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.9% | 11.7–16.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 20.0% | 17.6–22.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 39.8% | 35.5–44.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 45.0% | 40.0–50.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 30.7% | 27.7–33.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.2% | 18.1–22.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.7% | 14.9–18.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 20.6% | 18.6–22.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 43.6% | 39.5–47.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.6% | 6.7–8.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 13.2% | 11.9–14.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 22.0% | 19.8–24.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 7.5% | 6.9–8.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 9.7% | 8.9–10.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 32.4% | 28.6–36.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 33.2% | 30.1–36.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 31.8% | 29.0–34.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 24.2% | 21.6–26.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 16.9% | 15.2–18.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 38.7% | 34.1–43.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 19.8% | 17.7–21.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | LA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 28.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 17.8% (6.0–36.8%) n=504 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 14.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 10.4% (2.9–20.5%) n=505 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 13.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 14.0% (4.3–26.4%) n=508 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 25.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 16.6% (5.9–37.1%) n=508 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 8.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 5.5% (0.0–13.6%) n=501 |
| Households without a vehicle | 13.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 6.0% (0.0–15.0%) n=504 |
| Broadband subscription | 83.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 84.4% (64.1–94.5%) n=504 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 30.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.1% (9.3–41.8%) n=504 |
| Homeownership rate | 58.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.4% (50.9–92.7%) n=504 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.5% (0.0–4.8%) n=504 |
| Foreign-born population | 4.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.2% (0.0–7.6%) n=508 |
| Single-parent households | 48.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.0% (29.6–65.8%) n=495 |
| Population 65+ | 17.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.3% (10.2–29.0%) n=508 |
| Median age | 38.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 39.6 yr (33.0–52.4) n=500 |
| Median household income | $49,992 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $56,458 ($34,647–$88,928) n=457 |
| Median home value | $162,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $163,450 ($86,100–$284,620) n=452 |
| Median gross rent | $930 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $915 ($606–$1,325) n=389 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | LA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 72.6 yr ± 0.46 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 75.9 yr (73.2–79.0) n=494 |
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 0.46 years of 72.6, 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