Skip to main content
ZipVitals

Menu

ZIP code

83656

in Notus, IdahoPopulation 560

ZipVitals Score
How is the ZipVitals Score calculated? →

40.69/ 100

Ranked #26,280 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 18%)

Ranked #259 of 268 Idaho ZIPs (bottom 3.4%)

Ranked #38 of 38 Boise City, ID ZIPs (bottom 2.7%)

Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.

Robust across all 9 health domains

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.

Mammography

59.3%

in the bottom 0.7% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST1st
US1st
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.

Full methodology ›

Expected annual disaster loss

$0

in the bottom 2.0% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST1st
US2nd
Definition & source ›

FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.

Full methodology ›

Colon-cancer screening

53.8%

in the bottom 4.0% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST1st
US4th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.

Full methodology ›

Arsenic in groundwater

24.5%

in the top 4.6% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST88th
US95th
Definition & 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 ›

Tooth loss

25.7%

in the top 6.5% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST99th
US94th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.

Full methodology ›

Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance

1.9%

in the top 4.8% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST67th
US95th
Definition & 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 ›

Tree cover

0.00%

at the national minimum

Higher is healthier

ST1st
US1st
Definition & source ›

The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.

Full methodology ›

Walkability

130 intersections/sq mi

in the top 7.1% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST99th
US93rd
Definition & source ›

The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.

Full methodology ›

Distance to a Superfund site

65.9 mi

in the top 7.3% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST88th
US93rd
Definition & 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 ›

Hearing disability

11.2%

in the top 8.0% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST53rd
US92nd
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.

Full methodology ›

The read

Overall, Notus, Idaho (ZIP 83656) lands in the bottom 18% nationally (26,280th) and the bottom 3.4% of Idaho (259th).

continue reading

Several measures weigh most on this area's profile, and they come first: modeled mammography sits in the bottom 0.7% nationally, and colon screening is in the bottom 4.0% nationally. Modeled arsenic settles in the top 4.6% nationally, and tooth loss resides in the top 6.5% nationally. Modeled fine-particle registers in the top 4.8% nationally, and tree cover rests at the national minimum. On the better side, modeled expected annual loss stands in the bottom 2.0% nationally, walkability lies in the top 7.1% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site lands in the top 7.3% nationally. Households without a vehicle sits at the national minimum, shared with about 16% of ZIPs.

Set beside the nearby areas, walkability runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A note on the terms: expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 83607, just across the boundary, ranks better 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. Compare it against the US, this state and the Boise City, ID metro area.

Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.

Compare within

Nothing measured is lifting this score.

About typical

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 45%

21%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 59%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 44%

8%

Holding it back

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 19%

16%

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 10%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 3%

13%

Disability

healthier than 17%

7%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 29%

5%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 36%

5%

Nothing measured is lifting this score.

About typical

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 46%

21%

Holding it back

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 7%

16%

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 23%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 1%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 10%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 18%

8%

Disability

healthier than 27%

7%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 5%

5%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 33%

5%

Nothing measured is lifting this score.

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 8%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

in the bottom 0.00%

16%

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 25%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 4%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 4%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 29%

8%

Disability

in the bottom 0.00%

7%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 8%

5%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 8%

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.

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
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Arthritis among adults27.3%24.7–29.8
High blood pressure among adults33.9%30.8–36.9
Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults7.8%7.0–8.7
Current asthma among adults11.2%9.9–12.6
Coronary heart disease among adults7.4%6.5–8.4
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults8.2%7.0–9.5
Depression among adults23.2%20.4–26.1
Diagnosed diabetes among adults13.6%11.8–15.4
High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened36.3%33.2–39.6
Obesity among adults36.6%32.1–41.1
Stroke among adults3.9%3.5–4.4
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years25.7%22.1–29.8
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years16.0%12.8–19.3
Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure70.6%67.4–73.6
Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults72.5%69.2–75.5
Cholesterol screening among adults79.1%76.3–81.6
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years53.8%49.7–58.0
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults59.4%56.3–62.5
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years59.3%52.3–65.9
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Binge drinking among adults14.0%11.9–16.2
Current cigarette smoking among adults14.2%11.8–16.6
No leisure-time physical activity among adults28.9%24.7–33.0
Short sleep duration among adults36.2%32.4–40.2
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults23.6%20.4–27.1
Frequent mental distress among adults17.4%15.3–19.5
Frequent physical distress among adults16.4%14.3–18.5
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Cognitive disability among adults19.7%17.2–22.4
Any disability among adults42.5%38.2–46.9
Hearing disability among adults11.2%9.9–12.5
Independent living disability among adults10.2%8.7–11.7
Mobility disability among adults18.7%16.2–21.3
Self-care disability among adults4.9%4.2–5.6
Vision disability among adults6.9%6.0–7.9
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Lack of social and emotional support among adults21.6%18.6–24.7
Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults18.2%15.1–21.8
Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults12.6%10.3–15.5
Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults13.5%11.4–15.9
Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults10.0%8.5–11.7
Loneliness among adults30.0%26.6–33.8
Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults8.8%7.5–10.3
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)ID median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate15.2%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,3649.9% (1.2–20.3%) n=275
Uninsured 18–6416.9%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,28612.8% (0.0–25.9%) n=276
No HS diploma (25+)12.2%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,5056.9% (0.0–17.9%) n=275
Bachelor's or higher (25+)12.8%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50522.1% (8.6–44.8%) n=275
Unemployment rate (16+)6.7%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2742.5% (0.0–6.8%) n=274
Households without a vehicle0.0%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3221.8% (0.0–6.5%) n=275
Broadband subscription85.6%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32290.8% (79.9–100.0%) n=275
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)22.3%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32222.5% (1.7–33.4%) n=275
Homeownership rate81.9%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32280.7% (61.8–97.5%) n=275
Crowded housing (>1 per room)3.7%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3221.8% (0.0–7.2%) n=275
Foreign-born population10.5%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,5532.6% (0.0–13.3%) n=277
Single-parent households53.2%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08758.4% (44.1–86.8%) n=271
Population 65+8.8%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55320.6% (11.3–42.1%) n=277
Median age37.0 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29242.5 yr (31.8–62.3) n=273
Median household income$64,750$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$70,814 ($51,606–$96,415) n=252
Median home value$286,000$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$344,400 ($224,720–$577,280) n=247
Median gross rent$1,125$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$990 ($730–$1,495) n=192
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)ID median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy at birth79.4 yr ± 1.6678.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,30879.9 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 1.66 years of 79.4, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.

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