ZIP code
83536
in Kamiah, IdahoPopulation 4,444
42.97/ 100
Ranked #24,397 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 24%)
Ranked #246 of 268 Idaho ZIPs (bottom 8.3%)
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.
Hearing disability
14.4%
in the top 0.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Mammography
64.5%
in the bottom 2.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST16thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Distance to a community health center
39.7 mi
in the top 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest federally funded community health center, which serves patients regardless of ability to pay.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
2.3%
in the top 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST75thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of days in the year when modeled fine-particle (PM2.5) pollution was above the EPA’s daily limit of 35 micrograms per cubic meter.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
11.5%
in the bottom 4.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.24 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities 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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
68.3 mi
in the top 6.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Coronary heart disease
10.5%
in the top 6.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 7.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST33rdUS7thDefinition & 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 ›PFAS in drinking water
9.3%
in the bottom 7.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST21stUS7thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
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 ›The read
In overall standing, Kamiah, Idaho (ZIP 83536) comes out in the bottom 24% nationally (24,397th) and the bottom 8.3% of Idaho (246th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
The data is direct about where this area carries real strain: modeled hearing disability registers in the top 0.7% nationally, modeled mammography stands in the bottom 2.5% nationally, and distance to a community health center lands in the top 2.2% nationally. Modeled fine-particle is in the top 3.6% nationally, and coronary heart disease resides in the top 6.5% nationally. More encouragingly, modeled binge drinking rests in the bottom 4.6% nationally, and elder services lies in the top 5.9% nationally. Distance to a Superfund site sits in the top 6.9% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden settles in the bottom 7.1% nationally. Modeled pfas registers in the bottom 7.5% nationally.
In plain terms, fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. 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. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 83530, 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
Risk Behavior
healthier than 83%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 69%
8%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 72%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 52%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 13%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 26%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 21%
13%
Disability
healthier than 10%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the bottom 0.9%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 89%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 65%
8%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 51%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 60%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 12%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 14%
16%
Disability
healthier than 11%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 35%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the bottom 0.00%
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
83530
Idahoshares a border
Score 53.68
Closest healthier
83533
Idahoshares a border
Score 46.80
Similar health profile
88040
New Mexico97% similar profile
Score 45.51
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 | 36.6% | 33.8–39.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 41.8% | 38.7–45.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 11.5% | 10.6–12.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.5% | 10.5–12.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.5% | 9.5–11.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.1% | 9.8–12.6 |
| Depression among adults | 21.8% | 19.5–24.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.2% | 13.6–16.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.9% | 35.8–42.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 34.8% | 30.2–39.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–5.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 20.2% | 17.3–23.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.1% | 8.6–11.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 78.0% | 75.6–80.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.5% | 75.0–79.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.3% | 82.7–85.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.5% | 59.4–67.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 61.9% | 58.8–64.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 64.5% | 57.6–70.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 11.5% | 10.0–13.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.6% | 13.6–17.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 28.6% | 25.2–32.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.6% | 26.3–34.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 23.9% | 21.4–26.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.6% | 14.2–17.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.7% | 16.0–19.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.9% | 15.2–18.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 41.7% | 38.2–45.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 14.4% | 13.1–15.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.6% | 9.5–11.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 22.4% | 20.1–24.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.3–7.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.1% | 17.7–22.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.5% | 13.5–17.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 12.2% | 10.4–14.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.8% | 9.5–12.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.6% | 7.7–9.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.4% | 25.0–31.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.8% | 6.9–8.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | ID median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 12.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.9% (1.2–20.3%) n=275 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 21.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 12.8% (0.0–25.9%) n=276 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.9% (0.0–17.9%) n=275 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 25.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (8.6–44.8%) n=275 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.5% (0.0–6.8%) n=274 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 1.8% (0.0–6.5%) n=275 |
| Broadband subscription | 82.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 90.8% (79.9–100.0%) n=275 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 26.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (1.7–33.4%) n=275 |
| Homeownership rate | 84.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.7% (61.8–97.5%) n=275 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.8% (0.0–7.2%) n=275 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.6% (0.0–13.3%) n=277 |
| Single-parent households | 63.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 58.4% (44.1–86.8%) n=271 |
| Population 65+ | 33.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.6% (11.3–42.1%) n=277 |
| Median age | 53.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (31.8–62.3) n=273 |
| Median household income | $53,707 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $70,814 ($51,606–$96,415) n=252 |
| Median home value | $241,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $344,400 ($224,720–$577,280) n=247 |
| Median gross rent | $714 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $990 ($730–$1,495) n=192 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | ID median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 78.5 yr ± 1.15 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 79.9 yr (76.8–83.5) n=278 |
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 1.15 years of 78.5, 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