ZIP code
72658
in Norfork, ArkansasPopulation 1,804
44.78/ 100
Ranked #22,632 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 29%)
Ranked #96 of 562 Arkansas ZIPs (top 17%)
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.
Arsenic in groundwater
0.98%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST18thUS2ndDefinition & 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 ›Park land
54.3%
in the top 2.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Fiber broadband
99.7%
in the top 2.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
84.3%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Child-care access
0.63 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›Poverty rate
29.6%
in the top 7.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
11.3%
in the top 7.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST77thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
10.4%
in the top 7.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST74thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
46.5%
in the top 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST59thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Median household income
$36,094
in the bottom 3.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST10thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›The read
Norfork, Arkansas (ZIP 72658), by its composite score, sits in the bottom 29% nationally (22,632nd) and the top 17% of Arkansas (96th).
The measures that matter most for this area lead the way: poverty is in the top 7.1% nationally, and modeled hearing disability lands in the top 7.5% nationally. Modeled coronary heart disease stands in the top 7.1% nationally, and high blood pressure registers in the top 8.7% nationally. Household income settles in the bottom 3.7% nationally. On the better side, modeled arsenic sits in the bottom 1.9% nationally, park land lies in the top 2.1% nationally, and fiber broadband rests in the top 2.8% nationally. Modeled tree cover resides in the top 3.3% nationally, and childcare is in the top 6.6% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 72617, 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 86%
14%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 53%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 54%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 51%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 15%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 31%
8%
Disability
healthier than 19%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 35%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 24%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 79%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 76%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 88%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 85%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 74%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 84%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 53%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 34%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 18%
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 85.9; chronic-disease standing 14.6 — 71 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #999 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
72519
Arkansasshares a border
Score 37.81
Closest healthier
72617
Arkansasshares a border
Score 44.77
Similar health profile
35183
Alabama98% similar profile
Score 43.65
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% | 33.1–40.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 46.5% | 42.3–51.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 11.7% | 10.6–13.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.3% | 9.1–11.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.1% | 9.3–13.0 |
| Depression among adults | 25.8% | 22.3–29.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.5% | 12.6–16.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.1% | 37.0–45.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 37.8% | 31.4–45.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 16.8% | 13.6–20.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.0% | 7.3–11.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 82.0% | 79.2–84.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 82.1% | 78.8–85.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.1% | 86.3–89.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.2% | 60.9–71.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 53.8% | 49.8–57.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.7% | 63.5–79.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.7% | 10.4–15.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.7% | 13.8–20.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 31.8% | 26.9–37.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.9% | 29.7–42.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 25.2% | 21.6–29.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.1% | 15.0–19.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.6% | 15.3–20.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.0% | 14.7–19.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 39.0% | 34.1–44.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.3% | 10.0–12.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.2% | 8.8–11.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 20.5% | 17.5–23.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.1% | 4.3–5.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.4–7.2 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.1% | 20.5–28.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.3% | 11.6–17.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 8.9% | 7.1–11.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.4% | 8.6–12.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.7% | 6.6–8.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.6% | 27.0–36.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.8% | 6.6–9.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AR median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 29.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 16.3% (4.0–30.6%) n=574 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 14.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 11.3% (1.5–24.1%) n=573 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.0% (3.7–23.0%) n=577 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 11.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 15.5% (4.4–30.5%) n=577 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.1% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.9% (0.0–11.6%) n=573 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.1% (0.0–12.5%) n=574 |
| Broadband subscription | 80.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 83.2% (65.0–94.7%) n=574 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 13.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.4% (4.3–33.2%) n=574 |
| Homeownership rate | 75.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.6% (57.7–96.1%) n=574 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.3% (0.0–5.7%) n=574 |
| Foreign-born population | 4.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.8% (0.0–6.5%) n=578 |
| Single-parent households | 30.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 53.0% (35.3–79.3%) n=571 |
| Population 65+ | 26.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.7% (11.6–37.9%) n=578 |
| Median age | 41.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.6 yr (33.6–58.1) n=573 |
| Median household income | $36,094 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $53,893 ($36,003–$79,139) n=505 |
| Median home value | $113,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $128,200 ($73,260–$235,420) n=519 |
| Median gross rent | $716 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $800 ($568–$1,094) n=393 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AR median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 76.8 yr ± 1.74 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 76.2 yr (73.4–79.7) n=580 |
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 1.74 years of 76.8, 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