ZIP code
85298
in Gilbert, ArizonaPopulation 44,114
65.42/ 100
Ranked #1,845 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 5.8%)
Ranked #18 of 394 Arizona ZIPs (top 4.6%)
Ranked #13 of 159 Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ ZIPs (top 8.2%)
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
136.4 days/year
in the top 0.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Outer-floodplain exposure
92.2%
in the top 0.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS99thDefinition & 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
170 µg/L
in the top 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Median household income
$156,425
in the top 3.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
4.1%
in the bottom 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
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 ›Independent-living disability
5.1%
in the bottom 3.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
7.0%
in the bottom 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST13thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Obesity
27.1%
in the bottom 9.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST14thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Humid extreme heat
138.7 days/year
in the top 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year when modeled heat stress — temperature, humidity, sun, and wind combined — reaches levels hard on the body outdoors.
Full methodology ›The read
In its overall standing, ZIP 85298, one of several in Gilbert, Arizona lands in the top 5.8% healthiest ZIPs nationally (1,845th) and the top 4.6% of Arizona (18th).
This area's measures are easy to read as a mixed set: household income stands in the top 3.2% nationally, modeled utility shutoff rests in the bottom 4.4% nationally, and modeled independent living disability registers in the bottom 3.1% nationally. Modeled housing insecurity resides in the bottom 7.4% nationally, and obesity settles in the bottom 9.4% nationally. Set against that, modeled extreme heat is in the top 0.2% nationally, and outer-floodplain exposure sits in the top 0.4% nationally. Lithium in drinking water lands in the top 0.8% nationally, and modeled tree cover lies at the national minimum. Modeled humid heat stands in the top 7.7% nationally.
Against the wider neighborhood, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put simply, lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. Outer-floodplain exposure is land with a lower but real 1-in-500 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "500-year floodplain". On the overall standing, ZIP 85249, just across the boundary, ranks healthier.
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 88%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 73%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 92%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 94%
8%
Disability
healthier than 94%
7%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 58%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 59%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 14%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 90%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 81%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 78%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 86%
8%
Disability
healthier than 96%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 45%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 57%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 23%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 75%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 82%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 77%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 78%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 80%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 82%
8%
Disability
healthier than 93%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 33%
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
85142
Arizonashares a border
Score 60.24
Closest healthier
85249
Arizonashares a border
Score 66.12
Similar health profile
85383
Arizona100% similar profile
Score 64.49
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 | 23.4% | 21.6–25.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.1% | 26.9–31.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.3% | 8.6–10.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.8% | 8.9–10.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.8% | 4.4–5.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.6% | 4.0–5.1 |
| Depression among adults | 18.3% | 16.4–20.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.7% | 7.8–9.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.9% | 34.4–39.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 27.1% | 23.9–30.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.5% | 2.3–2.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.1% | 7.7–10.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.7% | 5.9–7.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.4% | 70.8–75.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.3% | 72.9–77.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.3% | 88.0–90.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 62.8% | 59.7–66.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 69.5% | 67.1–71.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.3% | 75.3–83.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.7% | 14.9–18.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.5% | 7.4–9.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 15.0% | 13.2–16.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.9% | 29.7–36.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 12.7% | 11.5–14.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.0% | 11.8–14.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.7% | 8.8–10.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 10.2% | 9.2–11.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 23.1% | 21.0–25.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.5–6.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.1% | 4.6–5.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.6% | 8.6–10.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.4% | 2.2–2.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.2% | 2.9–3.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 22.4% | 20.2–24.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.3% | 7.4–9.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 5.3% | 4.5–6.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.0% | 6.2–7.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.1% | 4.5–5.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.3% | 26.8–31.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.1% | 3.6–4.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | AZ median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 3.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.8% (4.6–36.9%) n=396 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 14.0% (5.0–32.9%) n=394 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.3% (2.0–25.9%) n=397 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 53.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.8% (6.0–53.1%) n=397 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.8% (0.0–14.3%) n=395 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–14.3%) n=394 |
| Broadband subscription | 97.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 90.4% (57.1–97.2%) n=394 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 19.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 25.5% (8.5–37.5%) n=394 |
| Homeownership rate | 91.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 76.3% (44.6–92.8%) n=394 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.3% (0.0–15.7%) n=394 |
| Foreign-born population | 9.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 7.6% (0.0–20.4%) n=397 |
| Single-parent households | 45.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.4% (30.6–79.7%) n=388 |
| Population 65+ | 15.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.0% (8.0–46.8%) n=397 |
| Median age | 40.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.9 yr (30.0–62.5) n=394 |
| Median household income | $156,425 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,137 ($39,000–$114,111) n=371 |
| Median home value | $652,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $326,300 ($73,560–$591,760) n=363 |
| Median gross rent | $2,785 | $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