ZIP code
83709
in Boise City, IdahoPopulation 58,928
56.40/ 100
Ranked #7,869 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 25%)
Ranked #39 of 268 Idaho ZIPs (top 14.6%)
Ranked #10 of 38 Boise City, ID ZIPs (top 26%)
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.
PFAS in drinking water
81.9%
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
0.00%
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Nitrate in drinking water
2.5%
in the top 5.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.6%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST57thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
39.5 per million
in the top 7.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.6%
in the bottom 6.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS6thDefinition & 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 ›Diabetes
9.2%
in the bottom 10.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST10thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
33.1%
in the bottom 9.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST19thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Obesity
29.6%
in the bottom 16% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS16thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›The read
On the composite measure, ZIP 83709, one of several in Boise City, Idaho stands in the top 25% healthiest ZIPs nationally (7,869th) and the top 14.6% of Idaho (39th).
Several signals sit on each side of the ledger here: modeled energy burden settles in the bottom 6.5% nationally. Distance to a community health center rests at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Modeled loneliness lands in the bottom 12.4% nationally, and diabetes settles in the bottom 10.1% nationally. Working the other way, modeled pfas rests in the top 1.5% nationally, disaster risk lands in the top 2.9% nationally, and tree cover settles at the national minimum. Modeled nitrate rests in the top 5.4% nationally, fine-particle lands in the top 5.9% nationally, and air-toxics cancer risk settles in the top 7.1% nationally.
Set beside the wider area around it, outer-floodplain exposure runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For clarity, 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. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Nitrate is a groundwater compound from fertilizer, manure, and sewage, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. ZIP 83642, 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. 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 87%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 84%
11%
Disability
healthier than 65%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 67%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 90%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 43%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 28%
13%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 81%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 61%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 64%
11%
Disability
healthier than 87%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 10%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 16%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 31%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 63%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 67%
16%
Disability
healthier than 67%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 71%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 63%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 58%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 50%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 21%
8%
“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
2 of our published findings list 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 6.2 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 82.9 — 77 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,964 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Highest-risk tenth
Air toxics and the years between the two ends of the risk scale
Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is 39.5 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 80.5 ± 0.8 years.
Ranked #1,534 of the 4,173 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by modeled air-toxics risk, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
83634
Idahoshares a border
Score 55.80
Closest healthier
83642
Idahoshares a border
Score 59.39
Similar health profile
98198
Washington97% similar profile
Score 55.69
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 | 26.3% | 23.8–28.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.6% | 28.7–34.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.1% | 7.3–8.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.7% | 9.4–11.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.7% | 5.1–6.3 |
| Depression among adults | 25.5% | 22.6–28.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.2% | 8.0–10.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.1% | 30.0–35.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 29.6% | 25.7–33.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.9% | 2.7–3.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.0% | 8.3–12.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.8% | 7.6–10.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 68.8% | 65.5–71.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 76.3% | 73.4–78.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 82.8% | 80.9–84.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.8% | 62.4–69.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.4% | 67.7–72.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.7% | 67.3–77.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.0% | 14.6–19.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.4% | 9.9–12.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 19.3% | 16.9–21.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.4% | 28.2–34.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.8% | 14.0–17.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.9% | 14.2–17.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.8% | 11.5–14.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.9% | 13.3–16.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 32.6% | 29.6–35.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.4% | 7.5–9.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.5% | 6.7–8.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.9% | 11.4–14.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.8–3.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 18.8% | 16.5–21.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.9% | 9.5–12.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.3% | 6.3–8.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.4% | 8.2–10.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.5% | 5.8–7.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.8% | 25.8–31.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.9% | 5.1–6.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | ID median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 7.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.9% (1.2–20.3%) n=275 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 12.8% (0.0–25.9%) n=276 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 6.9% (0.0–17.9%) n=275 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 37.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 22.1% (8.6–44.8%) n=275 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.5% (0.0–6.8%) n=274 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 1.8% (0.0–6.5%) n=275 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 90.8% (79.9–100.0%) n=275 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 21.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 22.5% (1.7–33.4%) n=275 |
| Homeownership rate | 81.3% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.7% (61.8–97.5%) n=275 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.8% (0.0–7.2%) n=275 |
| Foreign-born population | 6.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 2.6% (0.0–13.3%) n=277 |
| Single-parent households | 51.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 58.4% (44.1–86.8%) n=271 |
| Population 65+ | 15.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.6% (11.3–42.1%) n=277 |
| Median age | 36.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.5 yr (31.8–62.3) n=273 |
| Median household income | $92,786 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $70,814 ($51,606–$96,415) n=252 |
| Median home value | $474,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $344,400 ($224,720–$577,280) n=247 |
| Median gross rent | $1,803 | $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 | 80.4 yr ± 0.42 | 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 0.42 years of 80.4, 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