ZIP code
83627
in Hammett, IdahoPopulation 575
43.05/ 100
Ranked #24,337 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 24%)
Ranked #244 of 268 Idaho ZIPs (bottom 9.0%)
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
69%
in the top 0.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Home broadband subscription
46.9%
in the bottom 1.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›Nitrate in drinking water
28%
in the top 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of this area’s domestic-well groundwater at or above the federal nitrate limit of 10 milligrams 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
40.2%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
1.7%
in the bottom 3.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST10thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST14thUS4thDefinition & 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 ›Mammography
67.3%
in the bottom 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST41stUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Distance to a nursing home
12.6 mi
in the top 7.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST73rdUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare- or Medicaid-certified nursing home.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
2.0%
in the top 7.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.2%
in the top 7.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST39thUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›The read
On the composite measure, Hammett, Idaho (ZIP 83627) stands in the bottom 24% nationally (24,337th) and the bottom 9.0% of Idaho (244th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
A number of readings press hard on the profile and set its tone: modeled arsenic stands in the top 0.2% nationally, and home broadband subscription sits in the bottom 1.3% nationally. Modeled nitrate resides in the top 1.7% nationally, and mammography stands in the bottom 6.1% nationally. Distance to a nursing home sits in the top 7.3% nationally, modeled loud transportation noise resides in the top 7.3% nationally, and modeled fine-particle stands in the top 7.8% nationally. On the brighter side, park land sits in the top 3.3% nationally, housing-cost burden resides in the bottom 3.9% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden stands in the bottom 4.2% nationally.
Set beside the wider area around it, arsenic runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For clarity, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Nitrate is a groundwater compound from fertilizer, manure, and sewage, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. ZIP 83623, just across the boundary, ranks better overall among the ZIPs nearby.
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
Mental Health
healthier than 63%
8%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 61%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 53%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 37%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 31%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 12%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 7%
13%
Disability
healthier than 16%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 25%
5%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 58%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 40%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 14%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 32%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 7%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 7%
11%
Disability
healthier than 25%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 23%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 19%
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
83623
Idahoshares a border
Score 43.18
Closest healthier
83647
Idahoshares a border
Score 47.92
Similar health profile
85539
Arizona96% similar profile
Score 43.68
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 | 30.3% | 27.3–33.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.6% | 33.9–41.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.3% | 7.5–9.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.8% | 9.6–12.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.9% | 7.1–8.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.1% | 7.9–10.4 |
| Depression among adults | 21.7% | 18.8–25.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.1% | 12.3–16.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.5% | 32.7–40.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 37.7% | 31.2–44.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.2% | 3.8–4.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 23.5% | 20.0–27.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 17.1% | 14.6–19.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.1% | 70.1–76.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.4% | 69.7–76.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 81.2% | 78.9–83.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 58.1% | 53.4–62.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 57.6% | 54.2–61.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 67.3% | 59.7–74.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.9% | 10.7–15.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.9% | 13.7–18.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 29.2% | 25.0–33.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 37.5% | 32.1–43.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 24.4% | 21.4–27.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.3% | 14.6–18.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.9% | 15.1–19.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.9% | 15.9–20.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 40.8% | 36.5–45.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.9–12.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.1% | 8.9–11.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 19.9% | 17.6–22.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.8–6.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.6–8.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.8% | 18.9–25.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 19.9% | 17.0–23.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 14.6% | 12.2–17.2 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.9% | 12.9–17.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.1% | 8.9–11.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.3% | 26.0–34.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.7% | 8.5–11.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | ID median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 11.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.9% (1.2–20.3%) n=275 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 16.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 12.8% (0.0–25.9%) n=276 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 29.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.9% (0.0–17.9%) n=275 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 4.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (8.6–44.8%) n=275 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.5% (0.0–6.8%) n=274 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 1.8% (0.0–6.5%) n=275 |
| Broadband subscription | 46.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 90.8% (79.9–100.0%) n=275 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 1.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (1.7–33.4%) n=275 |
| Homeownership rate | 65.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.7% (61.8–97.5%) n=275 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.8% (0.0–7.2%) n=275 |
| Foreign-born population | 28.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.6% (0.0–13.3%) n=277 |
| Single-parent households | 69.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 58.4% (44.1–86.8%) n=271 |
| Population 65+ | 20.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.6% (11.3–42.1%) n=277 |
| Median age | 60.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (31.8–62.3) n=273 |
| Median household income | $61,250 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $70,814 ($51,606–$96,415) n=252 |
| Median home value | $163,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $344,400 ($224,720–$577,280) n=247 |
| Median gross rent | $1,075 | $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 ± 2.14 | 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 2.14 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