ZIP code
85051
in Phoenix, ArizonaPopulation 45,768
47.80/ 100
Ranked #19,181 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 40%)
Ranked #235 of 394 Arizona ZIPs (bottom 40%)
Ranked #120 of 159 Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ ZIPs (bottom 25%)
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.
Outer-floodplain exposure
99.2%
in the top 0.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 0.2%-annual-chance flood band — the “500-year” zone, a lower but real 1-in-500 yearly chance.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Dry extreme heat
134.9 days/year
in the top 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
3.2%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
54.8%
in the bottom 4.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST27thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Uninsured (under 65)
18.8%
in the top 5.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
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 ›Walkability
140 intersections/sq mi
in the top 5.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
70 µg/L
in the top 6.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST55thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Crowded housing
7.2%
in the top 8.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST74thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Transit access
2.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 11.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS89thDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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 ›The read
ZIP 85051, one of several in Phoenix, Arizona, overall, ranks in the bottom 40% nationally (19,181st) and the bottom 40% of Arizona (235th).
Several serious readings shape the profile and deserve first mention: outer-floodplain exposure registers in the top 0.2% nationally, modeled extreme heat resides in the top 0.3% nationally, and modeled loud transportation noise settles in the top 3.3% nationally. Modeled colon screening is in the bottom 4.8% nationally, uninsured sits in the top 5.6% nationally, and tree cover lands at the national minimum. Lithium in drinking water lies in the top 6.2% nationally, and crowded housing stands in the top 8.2% nationally. Modeled transportation noise rests in the top 10.4% nationally. On the better side, walkability registers in the top 5.8% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Outer-floodplain exposure is land with a lower but real 1-in-500 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "500-year floodplain". Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. ZIP 85021, 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 Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ 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 78%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 73%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 85%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 51%
11%
Disability
healthier than 41%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 23%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 12%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 5%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 18%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 74%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 84%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 40%
8%
Disability
healthier than 54%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 44%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 28%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 10%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 28%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 32%
11%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 80%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 51%
21%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 16%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 21%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 23%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 30%
8%
Disability
healthier than 31%
7%
“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
3 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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 76.0 ± 1.2 years. A median household income of $69,189 predicts 78.6 years — 2.6 years below.
Ranked #3,582 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 76.0 ± 1.2 years. The 39 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 78.0 years — 2.0 years below them.
Ranked #1,593 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 11.7; chronic-disease standing 78.1 — 66 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,063 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
85015
Arizonashares a border
Score 43.77
Closest healthier
85021
Arizonashares a border
Score 50.37
Similar health profile
85041
Arizona98% similar profile
Score 44.32
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 | 21.9% | 20.3–23.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 30.6% | 28.4–32.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.3% | 5.8–6.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.5% | 9.5–11.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.6% | 5.1–6.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.3% | 5.7–7.0 |
| Depression among adults | 19.1% | 17.1–21.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.7% | 10.6–12.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.3% | 33.0–37.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 33.7% | 30.1–37.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.2% | 3.0–3.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 16.0% | 13.8–18.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 18.8% | 16.8–21.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 69.7% | 67.3–72.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 70.8% | 68.1–73.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 81.8% | 79.9–83.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 54.8% | 51.4–58.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 52.4% | 49.7–55.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.8% | 68.1–77.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.7% | 13.9–17.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.7% | 12.3–15.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.5% | 23.0–27.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.2% | 34.9–41.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 23.1% | 21.2–25.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.0% | 15.5–18.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.6% | 12.4–14.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.0% | 15.5–18.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 33.4% | 30.8–35.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.4–7.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.8% | 8.0–9.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.4% | 13.1–15.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.4% | 4.1–4.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.9% | 6.4–7.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 29.2% | 26.9–31.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 24.0% | 21.9–26.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 17.5% | 15.7–19.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.4% | 15.7–19.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 12.2% | 11.0–13.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 35.1% | 32.5–37.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.8% | 8.8–11.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AZ median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 13.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.8% (4.6–36.9%) n=396 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 20.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.0% (5.0–32.9%) n=394 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 18.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.3% (2.0–25.9%) n=397 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 19.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.8% (6.0–53.1%) n=397 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.8% (0.0–14.3%) n=395 |
| Households without a vehicle | 9.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–14.3%) n=394 |
| Broadband subscription | 90.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 90.4% (57.1–97.2%) n=394 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 34.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 25.5% (8.5–37.5%) n=394 |
| Homeownership rate | 55.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 76.3% (44.6–92.8%) n=394 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 7.2% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.3% (0.0–15.7%) n=394 |
| Foreign-born population | 19.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 7.6% (0.0–20.4%) n=397 |
| Single-parent households | 38.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.4% (30.6–79.7%) n=388 |
| Population 65+ | 12.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (8.0–46.8%) n=397 |
| Median age | 34.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.9 yr (30.0–62.5) n=394 |
| Median household income | $69,189 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,137 ($39,000–$114,111) n=371 |
| Median home value | $326,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $326,300 ($73,560–$591,760) n=363 |
| Median gross rent | $1,322 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,303 ($683–$2,093) n=323 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AZ median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 76.0 yr ± 0.61 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 78.5 yr (75.1–82.8) n=354 |
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 0.61 years of 76.0, 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