ZIP code
85215
in Mesa, ArizonaPopulation 16,888
60.14/ 100
Ranked #4,754 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 14.9%)
Ranked #70 of 394 Arizona ZIPs (top 18%)
Ranked #47 of 159 Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ ZIPs (top 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.
Arsenic in groundwater
58.2%
in the top 0.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Dry extreme heat
132.9 days/year
in the top 0.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST78thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Park land
83.8%
in the top 0.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Outer-floodplain exposure
34.1%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST70thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Lithium in drinking water
140 µg/L
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Utility shut-off threat
3.6%
in the bottom 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
21.1%
in the top 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
75.8%
in the top 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
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 ›Housing insecurity
6.1%
in the bottom 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFAS — man-made “forever chemicals” that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down — were detected in EPA testing.
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 ›The read
Overall, ZIP 85215, one of several in Mesa, Arizona places in the top 14.9% healthiest ZIPs nationally (4,754th) and the top 18% of Arizona (70th).
The measures fall on both sides for this area, fairly evenly: park land lies in the top 0.5% nationally, and modeled utility shutoff rests in the bottom 2.0% nationally. Modeled housing insecurity resides in the bottom 2.9% nationally. Pulling the other way, modeled arsenic is in the top 0.4% nationally, modeled extreme heat lands in the top 0.4% nationally, and outer-floodplain exposure stands in the top 1.2% nationally. Lithium in drinking water registers in the top 1.5% nationally, modeled transportation noise settles in the top 2.3% nationally, and modeled pfas sits in the top 2.9% nationally. PFAS in drinking water lies at the national maximum.
Beside the areas that surround it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For readers new to these 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. Pfas is the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down; here a modeled estimate of the chance a private well contains them. Among nearby ZIPs, the nearest healthier one overall is ZIP 85268, about 2.8 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 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
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 89%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 97%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 96%
8%
Disability
healthier than 69%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 71%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 46%
21%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 12%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 18%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 92%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 95%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 89%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 90%
8%
Disability
healthier than 76%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 67%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 51%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 44%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 10%
14%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 85%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 91%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 88%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 87%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 79%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 56%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 25%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 22%
14%
“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
One of our published findings lists 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 81.2 ± 1.4 years. The 40 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 79.2 years — 2.0 years above them.
Ranked #1,393 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
85119
Arizonashares a border
Score 50.36
Closest healthier
85268
Arizonaabout 2.8 mi away
Score 63.97
Similar health profile
85248
Arizona99% similar profile
Score 62.30
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 | 32.6% | 30.1–34.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.7% | 35.1–40.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 14.0% | 13.0–15.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.0% | 9.0–11.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.0% | 7.2–8.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.1% | 6.2–8.1 |
| Depression among adults | 17.9% | 16.0–19.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.7% | 10.4–13.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 43.3% | 40.6–46.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 27.4% | 24.1–30.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.9% | 3.6–4.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.0% | 7.6–10.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.1% | 6.2–8.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.8% | 78.6–82.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.5% | 77.4–81.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 91.0% | 90.0–92.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.5% | 67.5–73.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.1% | 65.7–70.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.1% | 75.0–83.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.5% | 12.0–15.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.8% | 7.6–10.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 18.1% | 15.8–20.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.7% | 27.7–34.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.8% | 14.0–17.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 12.2% | 11.0–13.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.0% | 10.7–13.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 10.6% | 9.4–11.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 30.0% | 27.2–32.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.9% | 8.9–10.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.4% | 5.7–7.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.6% | 13.0–16.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.2% | 2.9–3.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.2% | 3.8–4.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.2% | 19.2–23.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.2% | 7.1–9.3 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 5.5% | 4.7–6.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 6.1% | 5.3–6.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.0% | 4.4–5.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.3% | 25.9–30.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 3.6% | 3.2–4.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AZ median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 6.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.8% (4.6–36.9%) n=396 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 10.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.0% (5.0–32.9%) n=394 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.3% (2.0–25.9%) n=397 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 39.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.8% (6.0–53.1%) n=397 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.8% (0.0–14.3%) n=395 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–14.3%) n=394 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 90.4% (57.1–97.2%) n=394 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 22.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 25.5% (8.5–37.5%) n=394 |
| Homeownership rate | 80.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 76.3% (44.6–92.8%) n=394 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.3% (0.0–15.7%) n=394 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 7.6% (0.0–20.4%) n=397 |
| Single-parent households | 64.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.4% (30.6–79.7%) n=388 |
| Population 65+ | 32.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (8.0–46.8%) n=397 |
| Median age | 53.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.9 yr (30.0–62.5) n=394 |
| Median household income | $98,831 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,137 ($39,000–$114,111) n=371 |
| Median home value | $441,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $326,300 ($73,560–$591,760) n=363 |
| Median gross rent | $1,958 | $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 | 81.2 yr ± 0.72 | 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 0.72 years of 81.2, 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