ZIP code
85132
in Florence, ArizonaPopulation 38,671
49.54/ 100
Ranked #16,884 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 47%)
Ranked #212 of 394 Arizona ZIPs (bottom 46%)
Ranked #111 of 159 Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ ZIPs (bottom 30%)
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.
Dry extreme heat
124.6 days/year
in the top 0.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST65thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
44.5%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
120 µg/L
in the top 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST81stUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Park land
22.9%
in the top 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST77thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Distance to a nursing home
13.6 mi
in the top 6.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST74thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare- or Medicaid-certified nursing home.
Full methodology ›Uninsured (under 65)
17.1%
in the top 7.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST80thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Nitrate in drinking water
0.09%
in the top 8.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of this area’s domestic-well groundwater at or above the federal nitrate limit of 10 milligrams per liter.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
18.1%
in the top 18% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS82ndDefinition & 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 ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, Florence, Arizona (ZIP 85132) ranks in the bottom 47% nationally (16,884th) and the bottom 46% of Arizona (212th).
The burdens that read clearest in the data come first: modeled extreme heat stands in the top 0.7% nationally, and arsenic settles in the top 1.2% nationally. Lithium in drinking water lies in the top 1.7% nationally, and distance to a nursing home resides in the top 6.4% nationally. Modeled uninsured lands in the top 7.5% nationally, modeled nitrate registers in the top 8.3% nationally, and slow internet speeds sits in the top 10.1% nationally. Better still, park land rests in the top 6.1% nationally, and subsidized affordable housing is in the top 10.5% nationally. Distance to a community health center stands at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Nitrate is a groundwater compound from fertilizer, manure, and sewage, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 85143, 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 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 72%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 69%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 79%
8%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 58%
16%
Disability
healthier than 56%
7%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 7%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 27%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 12%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 37%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 67%
21%
Disability
healthier than 68%
7%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 55%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 43%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 49%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 31%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 19%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 20%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 75%
14%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 46%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 39%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 39%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 24%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 11%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 39%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 33%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 16%
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
85128
Arizonashares a border
Score 38.66
Closest healthier
85143
Arizonashares a border
Score 53.50
Similar health profile
77066
Texas98% similar profile
Score 48.77
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 | 23.7% | 21.7–25.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 33.7% | 30.9–36.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.7% | 7.0–8.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.0% | 8.9–11.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.0% | 5.5–6.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.6% | 5.9–7.4 |
| Depression among adults | 18.7% | 16.3–21.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.5% | 10.2–12.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.0% | 35.0–41.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 38.9% | 34.4–43.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.2% | 3.0–3.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.7% | 8.9–12.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 17.1% | 14.8–19.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 70.3% | 67.4–72.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 70.8% | 67.5–74.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 80.9% | 78.8–82.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 60.6% | 56.7–64.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 54.5% | 51.4–57.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.8% | 65.6–77.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.1% | 15.5–20.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 14.1% | 12.3–15.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.3% | 21.3–27.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 40.8% | 36.7–45.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 21.7% | 19.5–24.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.5% | 14.8–18.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.1% | 12.6–15.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.3% | 14.6–18.0 |
| Any disability among adults | 32.6% | 29.5–35.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.8% | 7.1–8.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.5% | 6.7–8.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.0% | 11.6–14.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.4–4.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.9–5.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 28.8% | 25.8–31.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.2% | 16.0–20.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 11.0% | 9.6–12.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.0% | 12.3–15.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.4% | 8.4–10.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.8% | 30.3–37.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.0% | 7.9–10.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AZ median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.8% (4.6–36.9%) n=396 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 12.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.0% (5.0–32.9%) n=394 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 13.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.3% (2.0–25.9%) n=397 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 17.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.8% (6.0–53.1%) n=397 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.8% (0.0–14.3%) n=395 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–14.3%) n=394 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 90.4% (57.1–97.2%) n=394 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 24.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 25.5% (8.5–37.5%) n=394 |
| Homeownership rate | 86.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 76.3% (44.6–92.8%) n=394 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.3% (0.0–15.7%) n=394 |
| Foreign-born population | 9.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 7.6% (0.0–20.4%) n=397 |
| Single-parent households | 56.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.4% (30.6–79.7%) n=388 |
| Population 65+ | 18.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (8.0–46.8%) n=397 |
| Median age | 39.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.9 yr (30.0–62.5) n=394 |
| Median household income | $79,000 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,137 ($39,000–$114,111) n=371 |
| Median home value | $339,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $326,300 ($73,560–$591,760) n=363 |
| Median gross rent | $1,419 | $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 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