ZIP code
84626
in Elberta, UtahPopulation 396
61.60/ 100
Ranked #3,753 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 11.8%)
Ranked #48 of 284 Utah ZIPs (top 17%)
Ranked #13 of 27 Provo-Orem-Lehi, UT ZIPs (top 48%)
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.
Binge drinking
9.0%
in the bottom 0.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Home broadband subscription
100%
at the national maximum
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
29.6%
in the bottom 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST14thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
33.3%
in the bottom 3.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST5thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Uninsured (under 65)
18.9%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
10.1 per million
in the bottom 5.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST48thUS5thDefinition & 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 ›High blood pressure
26.5%
in the bottom 4.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST16thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Slow internet speeds
1.9%
in the top 6.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes whose fastest available download speed is under 10 Mbps.
Full methodology ›Stroke
2.3%
in the bottom 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.1%
in the top 8.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST60thUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›The read
Judged by its overall standing, Elberta, Utah (ZIP 84626) sits in the top 11.8% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,753rd) and the top 17% of Utah (48th).
A balanced showing across the data, with a few readings each side: modeled binge drinking is in the bottom 0.5% nationally, home broadband subscription lies at the national maximum, and modeled high cholesterol registers in the bottom 3.0% nationally. Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is in the bottom 5.2% nationally, high blood pressure lies in the bottom 4.1% nationally, and stroke registers in the bottom 4.3% nationally. Households without a vehicle is at the national minimum, shared with about 16% of ZIPs. On the other hand, modeled uninsured lies in the top 5.5% nationally, and slow internet speeds registers in the top 6.1% nationally. Modeled fine-particle is in the top 8.0% nationally.
Placed beside its immediate neighbors, park land runs far lower 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. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. A healthier nearby ZIP overall is ZIP 84045, about 1.2 miles away.
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 Provo-Orem-Lehi, 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 96%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 96%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 99%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 78%
8%
Disability
healthier than 80%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 87%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 58%
16%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 4%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 18%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 86%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 68%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 97%
8%
Disability
healthier than 62%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 40%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 16%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 11%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 27%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
in the top 0.00%
14%
Mental Health
in the top 0.00%
8%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 48%
21%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 10%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 10%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 5%
11%
Disability
healthier than 33%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 29%
5%
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
84628
Utahshares a border
Score 52.63
Closest healthier
84045
Utahabout 1.2 mi away
Score 66.77
Similar health profile
98821
Washington95% similar profile
Score 58.36
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 | 17.7% | 16.1–19.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 26.5% | 24.1–29.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.9% | 5.4–6.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.2% | 7.3–9.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.6% | 4.1–5.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.0% | 3.4–4.7 |
| Depression among adults | 21.3% | 19.0–23.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.5% | 8.3–10.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 29.6% | 27.1–32.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 34.3% | 30.3–38.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.3% | 2.1–2.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 12.6% | 10.3–15.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 18.9% | 13.8–25.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 60.6% | 57.6–63.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 66.9% | 63.7–70.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 77.7% | 73.5–80.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 62.3% | 58.6–65.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 67.4% | 64.6–70.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.0% | 66.2–77.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 9.0% | 7.7–10.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 7.0% | 5.5–8.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 18.3% | 14.9–21.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.4% | 32.0–39.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.4% | 13.7–19.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.8% | 12.7–16.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.1% | 10.4–13.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.7% | 12.3–17.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.6% | 23.7–31.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.4% | 5.6–7.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.3–7.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.7% | 8.3–11.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.9% | 2.5–3.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.0–5.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.2% | 18.0–24.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.9% | 11.1–20.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.4% | 5.4–10.2 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.2% | 10.0–16.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.0% | 6.4–10.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.2% | 29.8–36.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.1% | 6.4–9.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | UT median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 6.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 7.0% (1.0–21.5%) n=283 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 34.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 10.1% (2.9–25.0%) n=281 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 0.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.4% (0.0–15.0%) n=284 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 33.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 28.5% (10.8–53.1%) n=284 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.7% | 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 | 100.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.3% (78.4–98.3%) n=283 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 12.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.1% (7.6–35.3%) n=283 |
| Homeownership rate | 33.3% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.5% (52.0–96.8%) n=283 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.0% (0.0–7.6%) n=283 |
| Foreign-born population | 19.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 3.2% (0.0–11.8%) n=284 |
| Single-parent households | 54.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 49.8% (37.3–72.7%) n=281 |
| Population 65+ | 0.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 15.3% (7.9–29.1%) n=284 |
| Median age | 27.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 35.9 yr (27.6–52.1) n=283 |
| Median household income | — | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $82,344 ($52,938–$126,884) n=260 |
| Median home value | — | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $402,500 ($229,220–$651,780) n=259 |
| Median gross rent | — | $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 | 84.4 yr ± 1.49 | 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 1.49 years of 84.4, 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