ZIP code
84095
in South Jordan, UtahPopulation 38,532
61.90/ 100
Ranked #3,571 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 11.2%)
Ranked #47 of 284 Utah ZIPs (top 17%)
Ranked #8 of 43 Salt Lake City-Murray, UT ZIPs (top 19%)
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.
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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 5.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.6%
in the top 5.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST76thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Energy-cost burden
1.3%
in the bottom 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS3rdDefinition & 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
7.7%
in the bottom 3.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST11thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
4.4%
in the bottom 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
27.4%
in the bottom 5.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST22ndUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Obesity
27%
in the bottom 9.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
10 µg/L
in the bottom 7.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS7thDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Median household income
$126,968
in the top 7.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›The read
South Jordan, Utah (ZIP 84095), overall, ranks in the top 11.2% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,571st) and the top 17% of Utah (47th).
This area's most favorable readings come through plainly in the numbers: modeled energy burden lands in the bottom 3.0% nationally, diabetes lies in the bottom 3.5% nationally, and coronary heart disease stands in the bottom 5.1% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure rests in the bottom 5.2% nationally, modeled obesity registers in the bottom 9.2% nationally, and lithium in drinking water resides in the bottom 7.3% nationally. Household income settles in the top 7.7% nationally. On the other side, modeled tree cover is at the national minimum, and industrial-pollution burden sits in the top 5.3% nationally. Modeled fine-particle lands in the top 5.8% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, industrial-pollution burden runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. ZIP 84020, just across the boundary, comes out 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 Salt Lake City-Murray, UT 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 93%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 96%
11%
Disability
healthier than 92%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 83%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 86%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 36%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 31%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 74%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 85%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 82%
13%
Disability
healthier than 92%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 87%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 48%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 57%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 33%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 63%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 71%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 80%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 76%
8%
Disability
healthier than 85%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 73%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 46%
14%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 22%
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 ›
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.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 81.9 ± 1.7 years. The 44 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 79.1 years — 2.8 years above them.
Ranked #931 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 6.5 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 92.7 (top 10%) — 86 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,641 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
84020
Utahshares a border
Score 62.09
Closest healthier
84092
Utahabout 2.2 mi away
Score 64.78
Similar health profile
98607
Washington100% similar profile
Score 60.47
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 | 22.5% | 20.7–24.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 27.4% | 25.3–29.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.5% | 7.8–9.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.8% | 9.8–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.4% | 3.9–4.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.0% | 3.5–4.5 |
| Depression among adults | 27.4% | 25.0–29.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 7.7% | 6.8–8.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 31.6% | 29.3–33.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 27.0% | 23.9–30.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.4% | 2.2–2.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.3% | 6.0–8.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.3% | 6.3–8.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 68.3% | 65.5–70.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 71.3% | 68.8–73.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.6% | 83.0–86.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.0% | 66.2–71.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 74.9% | 72.8–77.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.6% | 70.8–80.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.5% | 13.7–17.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 6.6% | 5.7–7.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 15.1% | 13.2–17.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.8% | 29.8–36.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 12.8% | 11.5–14.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.0% | 14.4–17.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.2% | 10.1–12.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.4% | 11.2–13.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 25.0% | 22.7–27.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.0% | 5.4–6.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.4% | 8.4–10.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.2% | 2.0–2.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.8–3.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.6% | 18.5–22.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.0% | 7.8–10.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 3.7% | 3.1–4.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.6% | 6.6–8.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.1% | 4.5–5.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.1% | 31.3–36.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.9% | 4.2–5.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | UT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 3.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 7.0% (1.0–21.5%) n=283 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 10.1% (2.9–25.0%) n=281 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.4% (0.0–15.0%) n=284 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 48.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 28.5% (10.8–53.1%) n=284 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.7%) n=281 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.0% (0.0–7.7%) n=283 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.3% (78.4–98.3%) n=283 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 26.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.1% (7.6–35.3%) n=283 |
| Homeownership rate | 75.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.5% (52.0–96.8%) n=283 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.0% (0.0–7.6%) n=283 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 3.2% (0.0–11.8%) n=284 |
| Single-parent households | 50.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 49.8% (37.3–72.7%) n=281 |
| Population 65+ | 15.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 15.3% (7.9–29.1%) n=284 |
| Median age | 39.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 35.9 yr (27.6–52.1) n=283 |
| Median household income | $126,968 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $82,344 ($52,938–$126,884) n=260 |
| Median home value | $718,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $402,500 ($229,220–$651,780) n=259 |
| Median gross rent | $1,910 | $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 at birth | 81.9 yr ± 0.87 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.7 yr (77.0–85.3) n=277 |
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 0.87 years of 81.9, 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