ZIP code
84046
in Manila, UtahPopulation 704
50.66/ 100
Ranked #15,325 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 48%)
Ranked #224 of 284 Utah ZIPs (bottom 21%)
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.
Elder-services access
1.4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 nursing home
31.4 mi
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare- or Medicaid-certified nursing home.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
9.9%
in the bottom 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST28thUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Distance to an emergency room
31.9 mi
in the top 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS98thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare-certified hospital with an emergency room.
Full methodology ›Humid extreme heat
2.8 days/year
in the bottom 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST15thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year when modeled heat stress — temperature, humidity, sun, and wind combined — reaches levels hard on the body outdoors.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
10 per million
in the bottom 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST24thUS3rdDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a community health center
32.3 mi
in the top 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
78.1 mi
in the top 5.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST65thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Radon
3.1 pCi/L
in the top 9.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The modeled typical indoor radon level for this area, in picocuries per liter — the EPA recommends fixing a home at 4 pCi/L or above.
Modeled from indoor-radon measurements. In Alaska and Hawaii, where those measurements are not published, a US Geological Survey geologic radon-potential category stands in — a coarser input, disclosed rather than hidden.
Full methodology ›Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility
16.2 mi
in the top 7.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST82ndUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest facility that handles enough hazardous chemicals to require an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases.
Full methodology ›The read
Judged by its overall standing, Manila, Utah (ZIP 84046) sits in the top 48% healthiest ZIPs nationally (15,325th) and the bottom 21% of Utah (224th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
An even profile, with readings pulling both ways: elder services sits in the top 0.4% nationally, modeled binge drinking stands in the bottom 1.2% nationally, and modeled humid heat resides in the bottom 1.7% nationally. Modeled air-toxics cancer risk sits in the bottom 2.8% nationally, distance to a Superfund site stands in the top 5.4% nationally, and distance to a hazardous-chemical facility resides in the top 7.1% nationally. Against that, distance to a nursing home sits in the top 1.5% nationally, and distance to an emergency room stands in the top 1.7% nationally. Distance to a community health center resides in the top 3.6% nationally, and modeled radon sits in the top 9.0% nationally.
Placed beside its immediate neighbors, elder services runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put plainly, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Radon is a radioactive soil gas the EPA identifies as the top cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers. A healthier nearby ZIP overall is ZIP 82930, 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
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 73%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 96%
11%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 44%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 46%
8%
Disability
healthier than 40%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 32%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 35%
16%
Healthcare Access
in the bottom 0.3%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 73%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 88%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 80%
8%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 49%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 4%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 5%
16%
Disability
healthier than 15%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the bottom 0.4%
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
82930
Utahshares a border
Score 54.13
Closest healthier
82938
Wyomingless than 0.1 mi away
Score 50.91
Similar health profile
97825
Oregon97% similar profile
Score 50.84
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 | 34.1% | 30.2–38.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 39.8% | 35.2–44.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 11.8% | 10.5–13.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.9% | 9.6–12.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.8% | 7.7–9.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.5% | 7.2–9.9 |
| Depression among adults | 25.0% | 21.2–29.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 13.6% | 11.6–15.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.8% | 35.1–44.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 33.1% | 24.8–41.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.3% | 3.8–4.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.4% | 10.9–16.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.2% | 7.4–11.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.9% | 73.4–79.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 76.7% | 72.7–80.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.0% | 83.0–86.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.0% | 63.7–74.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.3% | 66.7–73.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.8% | 61.6–79.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 9.9% | 7.9–12.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.0% | 9.0–13.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.4% | 18.1–27.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.4% | 25.6–39.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.8% | 16.7–23.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.9% | 14.0–17.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.7% | 13.6–18.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.1% | 13.1–17.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 35.3% | 30.3–40.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.1% | 7.1–9.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 16.4% | 13.9–19.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.5–4.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.0% | 4.4–5.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 19.7% | 16.4–23.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.5% | 9.4–14.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.6% | 5.3–8.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.3% | 6.9–9.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.3% | 5.4–7.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.8% | 24.9–35.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.9% | 5.0–6.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | UT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 7.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 7.0% (1.0–21.5%) n=283 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 12.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 10.1% (2.9–25.0%) n=281 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.4% (0.0–15.0%) n=284 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 18.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 28.5% (10.8–53.1%) n=284 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.7%) n=281 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.0% (0.0–7.7%) n=283 |
| Broadband subscription | 90.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.3% (78.4–98.3%) n=283 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 24.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.1% (7.6–35.3%) n=283 |
| Homeownership rate | 86.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.5% (52.0–96.8%) n=283 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.0% (0.0–7.6%) n=283 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 3.2% (0.0–11.8%) n=284 |
| Single-parent households | 60.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 49.8% (37.3–72.7%) n=281 |
| Population 65+ | 22.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 15.3% (7.9–29.1%) n=284 |
| Median age | 46.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 35.9 yr (27.6–52.1) n=283 |
| Median household income | $76,250 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $82,344 ($52,938–$126,884) n=260 |
| Median home value | $281,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $402,500 ($229,220–$651,780) n=259 |
| Median gross rent | $961 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,321 ($834–$1,911) n=198 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | UT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
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