ZIP code
98027
in Issaquah, WashingtonPopulation 28,955
69.47/ 100
Ranked #689 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 2.2%)
Ranked #25 of 581 Washington ZIPs (top 4.4%)
Ranked #25 of 166 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA ZIPs (top 15%)
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.
Obesity
22.1%
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Median household income
$153,301
in the top 3.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$1
in the top 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS98thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
1.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental offices located 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 ›Humid extreme heat
4.8 days/year
in the bottom 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST19thUS3rdDefinition & 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 ›Mobility disability
7.1%
in the bottom 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
27.8%
in the bottom 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST11thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
6.9%
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.1%
in the bottom 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
11.0%
in the bottom 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 98027, one of several in Issaquah, Washington, by its overall standing, sits in the top 2.2% healthiest ZIPs nationally (689th) and the top 4.4% of Washington (25th).
Both sides of the picture show up plainly in this area's numbers: modeled obesity settles in the bottom 2.2% nationally, household income registers in the top 3.5% nationally, and dental providers stands in the top 1.8% nationally. Modeled humid heat lands in the bottom 2.9% nationally, mobility disability is in the bottom 2.0% nationally, and short sleep resides in the bottom 2.7% nationally. Modeled diabetes rests in the bottom 2.2% nationally, and energy burden lies in the bottom 1.5% nationally. Modeled fair or poor health sits in the bottom 1.7% nationally. By contrast, modeled expected annual loss settles in the top 1.6% nationally.
Held up against its neighbors, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. Energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 98006, 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 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 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%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 98%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 98%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 68%
8%
Disability
healthier than 98%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 94%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 69%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 56%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 56%
13%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 88%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 81%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 90%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 87%
8%
Disability
healthier than 92%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 69%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 55%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 54%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 73%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 88%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 64%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 86%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 83%
8%
Disability
healthier than 80%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 58%
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
98006
Washingtonshares a border
Score 73.53
Closest healthier
98029
Washingtonshares a border
Score 73.38
Similar health profile
98072
Washington100% similar profile
Score 70.55
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 | 21.5% | 20.2–22.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 27.2% | 25.6–28.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.3% | 7.8–8.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.9% | 9.1–10.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.2% | 3.9–4.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.4% | 3.1–3.9 |
| Depression among adults | 24.4% | 22.7–26.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 6.9% | 6.2–7.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.4% | 33.6–37.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 22.1% | 20.0–24.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.3% | 2.1–2.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 4.9% | 4.1–5.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.2% | 4.5–5.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 69.8% | 67.7–71.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 71.7% | 69.9–73.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.1% | 87.1–89.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.4% | 66.2–70.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 74.6% | 72.9–76.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.0% | 74.8–81.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.6% | 16.1–19.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 6.4% | 5.6–7.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 12.0% | 10.8–13.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 27.8% | 25.7–29.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 11.0% | 10.0–12.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.8% | 12.8–15.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.5% | 8.8–10.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 9.9% | 9.1–10.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 19.9% | 18.4–21.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.5–5.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.2–5.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 7.1% | 6.4–7.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.2% | 2.0–2.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 2.8% | 2.6–3.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | WA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.6% (3.5–22.3%) n=583 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 3.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 8.2% (1.8–22.7%) n=582 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 7.0% (1.5–16.5%) n=588 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 66.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 27.4% (12.3–59.7%) n=588 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.5% (0.0–9.7%) n=584 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.2%) n=580 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 92.7% (81.1–97.4%) n=580 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 31.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 28.9% (14.6–40.6%) n=580 |
| Homeownership rate | 67.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.2% (48.2–91.7%) n=580 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.6% (0.0–7.9%) n=580 |
| Foreign-born population | 18.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 6.7% (0.3–27.6%) n=588 |
| Single-parent households | 55.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 54.3% (40.5–76.0%) n=574 |
| Population 65+ | 16.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (10.3–36.9%) n=588 |
| Median age | 40.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.0 yr (32.9–58.8) n=584 |
| Median household income | $153,301 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $84,646 ($56,217–$132,145) n=547 |
| Median home value | $996,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $452,750 ($241,540–$826,380) n=542 |
| Median gross rent | $2,400 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,416 ($840–$2,197) n=476 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | WA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 82.0 yr ± 0.59 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.2 yr (77.3–83.1) n=584 |
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 0.59 years of 82.0, 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