ZIP code
83703
in Boise City, IdahoPopulation 17,583
60.65/ 100
Ranked #4,363 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 13.7%)
Ranked #12 of 268 Idaho ZIPs (top 4.5%)
Ranked #5 of 38 Boise City, ID ZIPs (top 13.2%)
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
39.1%
in the top 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS98thDefinition & 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 ›PFAS in drinking water
81.1%
in the top 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Outer-floodplain exposure
20.6%
in the top 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Loneliness
27.1%
in the bottom 3.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST26thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Subsidized affordable housing
419 units
in the top 5.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.6%
in the top 5.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST58thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Fatal road crashes
2.3 per 100,000 residents per year
in the bottom 7.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.5%
in the bottom 5.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS5thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
29.8%
in the bottom 8.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST19thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Park land
13.8%
in the top 9.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST78thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite measure, ZIP 83703, one of several in Boise City, Idaho sits in the top 13.7% healthiest ZIPs nationally (4,363rd) and the top 4.5% of Idaho (12th).
The profile cuts both ways, and the readings bear that out: modeled loneliness stands in the bottom 3.4% nationally, subsidized affordable housing is in the top 5.6% nationally, and fatal road crashes rests in the bottom 7.8% nationally. Modeled energy burden sits in the bottom 5.4% nationally, modeled short sleep registers in the bottom 8.8% nationally, and park land lands in the top 9.4% nationally. Working the other way, modeled arsenic resides in the top 1.7% nationally, and pfas lies in the top 1.7% nationally. Outer-floodplain exposure settles in the top 1.9% nationally, and modeled fine-particle stands in the top 5.8% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs that surround it, arsenic runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain language, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Pfas is the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down; here a modeled estimate of the chance a private well contains them. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. ZIP 83702, just across the boundary, ranks healthier 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.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 83%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 96%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 93%
11%
Disability
healthier than 73%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 65%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 82%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 48%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 59%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 11%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 88%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 86%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 86%
11%
Disability
healthier than 92%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 80%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 52%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 24%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 28%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 67%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 88%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 88%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 79%
8%
Disability
healthier than 79%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 67%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 50%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 29%
14%
“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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 10.9; chronic-disease standing 83.4 — 73 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,615 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
83702
Idahoshares a border
Score 62.26
Closest healthier
83616
Idahoabout 1.8 mi away
Score 61.60
Similar health profile
28704
North Carolina98% similar profile
Score 58.12
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 | 26.9% | 24.3–29.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.0% | 29.0–34.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.9% | 8.0–9.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.6% | 5.0–6.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.4% | 4.7–6.0 |
| Depression among adults | 24.9% | 22.1–27.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.0% | 7.8–10.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.6% | 30.6–36.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 28.7% | 24.9–32.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.9% | 2.6–3.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.3% | 6.8–9.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.4% | 6.3–8.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 70.5% | 67.1–73.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.6% | 74.7–80.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.3% | 82.4–86.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.9% | 65.5–72.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 72.3% | 69.8–74.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.1% | 68.8–78.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.6% | 14.3–18.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.5% | 8.2–11.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 17.4% | 15.0–19.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 29.8% | 26.8–33.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 14.4% | 12.7–16.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.5% | 13.0–16.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.0% | 10.6–13.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.3% | 11.9–14.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 30.9% | 27.9–33.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.5% | 7.6–9.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.8% | 6.1–7.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.3% | 10.8–13.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.9% | 2.6–3.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.8% | 3.4–4.2 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 16.7% | 14.7–19.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.1% | 7.7–10.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.2% | 5.2–7.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.9% | 6.8–9.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.7% | 5.0–6.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 27.1% | 24.2–30.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.2% | 4.5–6.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | ID median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.9% (1.2–20.3%) n=275 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 12.8% (0.0–25.9%) n=276 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.9% (0.0–17.9%) n=275 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 52.8% | 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 | 4.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 1.8% (0.0–6.5%) n=275 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 90.8% (79.9–100.0%) n=275 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 35.2% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (1.7–33.4%) n=275 |
| Homeownership rate | 64.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.7% (61.8–97.5%) n=275 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.8% (0.0–7.2%) n=275 |
| Foreign-born population | 4.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.6% (0.0–13.3%) n=277 |
| Single-parent households | 56.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 58.4% (44.1–86.8%) n=271 |
| Population 65+ | 18.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.6% (11.3–42.1%) n=277 |
| Median age | 42.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (31.8–62.3) n=273 |
| Median household income | $76,910 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $70,814 ($51,606–$96,415) n=252 |
| Median home value | $508,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $344,400 ($224,720–$577,280) n=247 |
| Median gross rent | $1,432 | $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 ± 0.57 | 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 0.57 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