ZIP code
84317
in Huntsville, UtahPopulation 2,962
63.86/ 100
Ranked #2,529 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 7.9%)
Ranked #24 of 284 Utah ZIPs (top 8.5%)
Ranked #3 of 22 Ogden, UT ZIPs (top 13.7%)
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.
Lack of transportation
4.2%
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
10.4%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST41stUS2ndDefinition & 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 ›Housing insecurity
6.2%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.9%
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Utility shut-off threat
4.2%
in the bottom 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
7.4%
in the bottom 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
11.6 per million
in the bottom 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST51stUS6thDefinition & 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 ›Median household income
$130,040
in the top 7.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Park land
21.1%
in the top 6.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST86thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
74%
in the top 4.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›The read
Huntsville, Utah (ZIP 84317), in overall standing, comes out in the top 7.9% healthiest ZIPs nationally (2,529th) and the top 8.5% of Utah (24th).
A balanced showing across the data, with a few readings each side: modeled transportation sits in the bottom 2.2% nationally, binge drinking stands in the bottom 1.9% nationally, and housing insecurity resides in the bottom 3.3% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff sits in the bottom 5.0% nationally, food insecurity stands in the bottom 5.0% nationally, and air-toxics cancer risk resides in the bottom 5.7% nationally. Household income sits in the top 7.0% nationally, and park land stands in the top 6.6% nationally. Modeled colon screening resides in the top 4.8% nationally. On the other hand, modeled fine-particle sits in the top 4.8% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 84018, 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. Compare it against the US, this state and the Ogden, 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 70%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 85%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.5%
11%
Disability
healthier than 86%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 95%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 44%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 47%
8%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 39%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 87%
16%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.6%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 84%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 82%
8%
Disability
healthier than 73%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 70%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 58%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 47%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 27%
21%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 62%
16%
Environmental Hazard
in the top 0.00%
14%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.00%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.00%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 90%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 67%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 48%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
in the bottom 0.00%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 14%
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
84018
Utahshares a border
Score 65.46
Closest healthier
84310
Utahshares a border
Score 64.23
Similar health profile
99113
Washington99% similar profile
Score 58.77
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 | 31.0% | 28.2–33.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.1% | 31.2–37.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.9% | 9.9–12.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.1% | 9.8–12.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.8% | 5.1–6.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.2–5.9 |
| Depression among adults | 26.2% | 23.3–29.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.7% | 8.4–11.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.7% | 35.4–41.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 32.5% | 28.4–36.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.9% | 2.6–3.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 5.6% | 4.5–6.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.6% | 4.5–6.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.3% | 70.1–76.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.4% | 75.8–80.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.5% | 87.0–89.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 74.0% | 70.6–77.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 76.6% | 74.2–79.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.7% | 72.3–82.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 10.4% | 8.8–12.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 7.1% | 5.7–8.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 16.1% | 13.6–19.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.7% | 27.2–34.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 13.4% | 11.5–15.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.9% | 13.2–16.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.2% | 10.6–13.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.4% | 10.8–14.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 28.6% | 25.3–32.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.7% | 4.9–6.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.5–13.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.6% | 2.3–3.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.2% | 2.8–3.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 17.9% | 15.4–20.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.4% | 6.0–8.9 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 3.2% | 2.5–4.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.2% | 5.1–7.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.2% | 3.6–4.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.7% | 25.4–31.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.2% | 3.5–4.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | UT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 3.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 7.0% (1.0–21.5%) n=283 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 16.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 10.1% (2.9–25.0%) n=281 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 1.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.4% (0.0–15.0%) n=284 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 39.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 28.5% (10.8–53.1%) n=284 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.7%) n=281 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.0% (0.0–7.7%) n=283 |
| Broadband subscription | 81.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.3% (78.4–98.3%) n=283 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 19.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.1% (7.6–35.3%) n=283 |
| Homeownership rate | 90.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.5% (52.0–96.8%) n=283 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.0% (0.0–7.6%) n=283 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 3.2% (0.0–11.8%) n=284 |
| Single-parent households | 60.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 49.8% (37.3–72.7%) n=281 |
| Population 65+ | 22.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 15.3% (7.9–29.1%) n=284 |
| Median age | 45.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 35.9 yr (27.6–52.1) n=283 |
| Median household income | $130,040 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $82,344 ($52,938–$126,884) n=260 |
| Median home value | $762,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $402,500 ($229,220–$651,780) n=259 |
| Median gross rent | $1,477 | $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 | 82.5 yr ± 1.69 | 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 1.69 years of 82.5, 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