Advanced Search: Build a Custom Dashboard

In the fields below, search for indicators by location, topics, population, classification, subgroup, or comparison. No fields are required, but we suggest selecting a location or two to start. In the additional search options section, select options to group and order search results. To learn more about how to customize a dashboard, see our help center.

Visit the Indicator List Page to see the full list of indicators and locations available on the site.

  • Map View
  • County : Dooly Census Tracts
  • County : Dooly Zip Codes
  • County : Dougherty Census Tracts
  • County : Dougherty Zip Codes
  • County : Lee Census Tracts
  • County : Lee Zip Codes
  • County : Macon Census Tracts
  • County : Macon Zip Codes
  • County : Marion Census Tracts
  • County : Marion Zip Codes
  • County : Mitchell Census Tracts
  • County : Mitchell Zip Codes
  • County : Schley Census Tracts
  • County : Schley Zip Codes
  • County : Stewart Census Tracts
  • County : Stewart Zip Codes
  • County : Sumter Census Tracts
  • County : Sumter Zip Codes
  • County : Terrell Census Tracts
  • County : Terrell Zip Codes
  • County : Webster Census Tracts
  • County : Webster Zip Codes
  • County : Worth Census Tracts
  • County : Worth Zip Codes
  • All Health Topics
  • All Community Topics
  • All Economy Topics
  • All Education Topics
  • All Environmental Health Topics
Search display options:

Search Results:

Indicator Gauge Icon Legend

Legend Colors

Red is bad, green is good, blue is not statistically different/neutral.

Compared to Distribution

an indicator guage with the arrow in the green the value is in the best half of communities.

an indicator guage with the arrow in the yellow the value is in the 2nd worst quarter of communities.

an indicator guage with the arrow in the red the value is in the worst quarter of communities.

Compared to Target

green circle with white tick inside it meets target; red circle with white cross inside it does not meet target.

Compared to a Single Value

green diamond with downward arrow inside it lower than the comparison value; red diamond with downward arrow inside it higher than the comparison value; blue diamond with downward arrow inside it not statistically different from comparison value.

Trend

green square outline with upward trending arrow inside it green square outline with downward trending arrow inside it non-significant change over time; green square with upward trending arrow inside it green square with downward trending arrow inside it significant change over time; blue square with equals sign no change over time.

Compared to Prior Value

green triangle with upward trending arrow inside it higher than the previous measurement period; green triangle with downward trending arrow inside it lower than the previous measurement period; blue equals sign no statistically different change  from previous measurement period.

More information about the gauges and icons

Health / County Health Rankings

Health / County Health Rankings

Health / County Health Rankings

Morbidity Ranking

Value
Compared to:

Health / County Health Rankings

Morbidity Ranking

Value
Compared to:

Morbidity Ranking County: Webster

Current Value:

Morbidity Ranking County: Webster

98
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Webster has a value of 98 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Morbidity Ranking County: Worth

Current Value:

Morbidity Ranking County: Worth

129
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Worth has a value of 129 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Health / County Health Rankings

Mortality Ranking

Value
Compared to:

Health / County Health Rankings

Mortality Ranking

Value
Compared to:

Mortality Ranking County: Dooly

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Dooly

123
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Dooly has a value of 123 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Mortality Ranking County: Dougherty

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Dougherty

149
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Dougherty has a value of 149 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Mortality Ranking County: Lee

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Lee

45
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Lee has a value of 45 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Mortality Ranking County: Macon

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Macon

133
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Macon has a value of 133 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Mortality Ranking County: Marion

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Marion

87
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Marion has a value of 87 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Mortality Ranking County: Mitchell

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Mitchell

129
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Mitchell has a value of 129 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Mortality Ranking County: Schley

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Schley

53
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Schley has a value of 53 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Mortality Ranking County: Stewart

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Stewart

127
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Stewart has a value of 127 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Mortality Ranking County: Sumter

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Sumter

109
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Sumter has a value of 109 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Mortality Ranking County: Terrell

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Terrell

130
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Terrell has a value of 130 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Mortality Ranking County: Webster

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Webster

74
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Webster has a value of 74 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Mortality Ranking County: Worth

Current Value:

Mortality Ranking County: Worth

107
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Worth has a value of 107 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Health / County Health Rankings

Physical Environment Ranking

Value
Compared to:

Health / County Health Rankings

Physical Environment Ranking

Value
Compared to:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Dooly

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Dooly

46
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Dooly has a value of 46 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Physical Environment Ranking County: Dougherty

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Dougherty

146
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Dougherty has a value of 146 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Physical Environment Ranking County: Lee

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Lee

48
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Lee has a value of 48 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Physical Environment Ranking County: Macon

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Macon

149
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Macon has a value of 149 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Physical Environment Ranking County: Marion

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Marion

120
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Marion has a value of 120 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Physical Environment Ranking County: Mitchell

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Mitchell

113
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Mitchell has a value of 113 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Physical Environment Ranking County: Schley

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Schley

66
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Schley has a value of 66 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Physical Environment Ranking County: Stewart

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Stewart

125
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Stewart has a value of 125 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Physical Environment Ranking County: Sumter

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Sumter

62
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Sumter has a value of 62 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Physical Environment Ranking County: Terrell

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Terrell

101
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Terrell has a value of 101 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Physical Environment Ranking County: Webster

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Webster

51
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Webster has a value of 51 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Physical Environment Ranking County: Worth

Current Value:

Physical Environment Ranking County: Worth

92
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Worth has a value of 92 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Health / County Health Rankings

Social and Economic Factors Ranking

Value
Compared to:

Health / County Health Rankings

Social and Economic Factors Ranking

Value
Compared to:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Dooly

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Dooly

151
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Dooly has a value of 151 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Dougherty

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Dougherty

144
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Dougherty has a value of 144 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Lee

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Lee

12
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Lee has a value of 12 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Macon

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Macon

156
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Macon has a value of 156 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Marion

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Marion

88
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Marion has a value of 88 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Mitchell

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Mitchell

130
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Mitchell has a value of 130 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Schley

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Schley

36
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Schley has a value of 36 which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Stewart

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Stewart

146
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Stewart has a value of 146 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Sumter

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Sumter

142
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Sumter has a value of 142 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Terrell

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Terrell

148
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Terrell has a value of 148 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Webster

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Webster

127
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Webster has a value of 127 which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Worth

Current Value:

Social and Economic Factors Ranking County: Worth

96
(2023)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Worth has a value of 96 which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 80 while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 119.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.

Health / Diabetes

Health / Diabetes

Health / Diabetes

Adults 20+ with Diabetes

Value
Compared to:

Health / Diabetes

Adults 20+ with Diabetes

Value
Compared to:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Dooly

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Dooly

9.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Dooly has a value of 9.1% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Dooly has a value of 9.1% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Dooly (9.1%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (9.6%).
Prior Value
(9.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Dooly value is increasing, not significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Dougherty

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Dougherty

13.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Dougherty has a value of 13.0% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Dougherty has a value of 13.0% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Dougherty (13.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (13.0%).
Prior Value
(13.0%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Dougherty value is increasing significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Lee

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Lee

10.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Lee has a value of 10.7% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Lee has a value of 10.7% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Lee (10.7%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (9.9%).
Prior Value
(9.9%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Lee value is increasing significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Macon

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Macon

10.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Macon has a value of 10.8% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Macon has a value of 10.8% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Macon (10.8%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (9.8%).
Prior Value
(9.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Macon value is increasing significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Marion

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Marion

8.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Marion has a value of 8.3% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Marion has a value of 8.3% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Marion (8.3%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (7.1%).
Prior Value
(7.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Marion value is decreasing, significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Mitchell

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Mitchell

10.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Mitchell has a value of 10.8% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Mitchell has a value of 10.8% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Mitchell (10.8%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (8.8%).
Prior Value
(8.8%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Mitchell value is decreasing, not significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Schley

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Schley

7.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Schley has a value of 7.7% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Schley has a value of 7.7% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Schley (7.7%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (7.5%).
Prior Value
(7.5%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Schley value is decreasing, not significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Stewart

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Stewart

8.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Stewart has a value of 8.9% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Stewart has a value of 8.9% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Stewart (8.9%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (8.6%).
Prior Value
(8.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Stewart value is decreasing, not significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Sumter

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Sumter

10.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Sumter has a value of 10.7% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Sumter has a value of 10.7% which is in the worst 25% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Sumter (10.7%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (12.7%).
Prior Value
(12.7%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Sumter value is increasing, not significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Terrell

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Terrell

9.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Terrell has a value of 9.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Terrell has a value of 9.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Terrell (9.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (8.1%).
Prior Value
(8.1%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Terrell value is decreasing, not significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Webster

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Webster

8.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Webster has a value of 8.3% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Webster has a value of 8.3% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Webster (8.3%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (7.6%).
Prior Value
(7.6%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Webster value is decreasing, not significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Worth

Current Value:

Adults 20+ with Diabetes County: Worth

9.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Counties, Worth has a value of 9.0% which is in the best 50% of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 9.0% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 10.0%.
GA Counties
The distribution is based on data from 159 Georgia counties.
Compared to U.S. Counties, Worth has a value of 9.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of counties. Counties in the best 50% have a value lower than 8.3% while counties in the worst 25% have a value higher than 9.4%.
U.S. Counties
The distribution is based on data from 3,074 U.S. counties and county equivalents.
Compared to the prior value, Worth (9.0%) is not statistically different from the previously measured value (10.3%).
Prior Value
(10.3%)
Prior Value compares a measured value with the previously measured value. Confidence intervals were taken into account in determining the direction of the comparison.
Over time, the Worth value is decreasing, not significantly.
Trend
This comparison measures the indicator’s values over multiple time periods.<br>The Mann-Kendall Test for Statistical Significance is used to evaluate the trend<br>over 4 to 10 periods of measure, subject to data availability and comparability.

Health / Diabetes

Adults with Diabetes

Value
Compared to:

Health / Diabetes

Adults with Diabetes

Value
Compared to:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Albany

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Albany

15.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Albany has a value of 15.8% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Albany has a value of 15.8% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Albany has a value of 15.8% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Americus

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Americus

14.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Americus has a value of 14.5% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Americus has a value of 14.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Americus has a value of 14.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Andersonville

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Andersonville

15.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Andersonville has a value of 15.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Andersonville has a value of 15.0% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Andersonville has a value of 15.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Baconton

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Baconton

16.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Baconton has a value of 16.3% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Baconton has a value of 16.3% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Baconton has a value of 16.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Bronwood

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Bronwood

18.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Bronwood has a value of 18.9% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Bronwood has a value of 18.9% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Bronwood has a value of 18.9% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Buena Vista

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Buena Vista

16.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Buena Vista has a value of 16.2% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Buena Vista has a value of 16.2% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Buena Vista has a value of 16.2% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Byromville

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Byromville

18.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Byromville has a value of 18.3% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Byromville has a value of 18.3% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Byromville has a value of 18.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Camilla

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Camilla

17.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Camilla has a value of 17.8% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Camilla has a value of 17.8% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Camilla has a value of 17.8% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Dawson

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Dawson

20.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Dawson has a value of 20.1% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Dawson has a value of 20.1% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Dawson has a value of 20.1% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): De Soto

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): De Soto

17.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, De Soto has a value of 17.6% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, De Soto has a value of 17.6% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), De Soto has a value of 17.6% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Dooling

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Dooling

19.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Dooling has a value of 19.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Dooling has a value of 19.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Dooling has a value of 19.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Ellaville

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Ellaville

15.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Ellaville has a value of 15.1% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Ellaville has a value of 15.1% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Ellaville has a value of 15.1% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Ideal

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Ideal

24.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Ideal has a value of 24.6% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Ideal has a value of 24.6% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Ideal has a value of 24.6% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Leesburg

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Leesburg

10.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Leesburg has a value of 10.5% which is in the best 50% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Leesburg has a value of 10.5% which is in the best 50% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Leesburg has a value of 10.5% which is lower and better.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Leslie

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Leslie

15.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Leslie has a value of 15.5% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Leslie has a value of 15.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Leslie has a value of 15.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Lilly

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Lilly

14.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Lilly has a value of 14.2% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Lilly has a value of 14.2% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Lilly has a value of 14.2% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Lumpkin

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Lumpkin

14.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Lumpkin has a value of 14.3% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Lumpkin has a value of 14.3% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Lumpkin has a value of 14.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Marshallville

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Marshallville

20.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Marshallville has a value of 20.1% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Marshallville has a value of 20.1% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Marshallville has a value of 20.1% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Meigs

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Meigs

19.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Meigs has a value of 19.3% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Meigs has a value of 19.3% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Meigs has a value of 19.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Montezuma

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Montezuma

19.4%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Montezuma has a value of 19.4% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Montezuma has a value of 19.4% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Montezuma has a value of 19.4% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Oglethorpe

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Oglethorpe

19.4%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Oglethorpe has a value of 19.4% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Oglethorpe has a value of 19.4% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Oglethorpe has a value of 19.4% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Parrott

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Parrott

19.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Parrott has a value of 19.0% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Parrott has a value of 19.0% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Parrott has a value of 19.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Pelham

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Pelham

17.4%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Pelham has a value of 17.4% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Pelham has a value of 17.4% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Pelham has a value of 17.4% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Pinehurst

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Pinehurst

14.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Pinehurst has a value of 14.3% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Pinehurst has a value of 14.3% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Pinehurst has a value of 14.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Plains

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Plains

18.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Plains has a value of 18.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Plains has a value of 18.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Plains has a value of 18.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Poulan

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Poulan

15.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Poulan has a value of 15.3% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Poulan has a value of 15.3% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Poulan has a value of 15.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Putney

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Putney

14.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Putney has a value of 14.3% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Putney has a value of 14.3% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Putney has a value of 14.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Richland

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Richland

19.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Richland has a value of 19.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Richland has a value of 19.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Richland has a value of 19.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Sale City

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Sale City

16.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Sale City has a value of 16.9% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Sale City has a value of 16.9% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Sale City has a value of 16.9% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Sasser

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Sasser

15.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Sasser has a value of 15.5% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Sasser has a value of 15.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Sasser has a value of 15.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Smithville

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Smithville

16.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Smithville has a value of 16.1% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Smithville has a value of 16.1% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Smithville has a value of 16.1% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Sumner

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Sumner

14.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Sumner has a value of 14.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Sumner has a value of 14.0% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Sumner has a value of 14.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Sylvester

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Sylvester

14.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Sylvester has a value of 14.7% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Sylvester has a value of 14.7% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Sylvester has a value of 14.7% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Unadilla

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Unadilla

13.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Unadilla has a value of 13.9% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Unadilla has a value of 13.9% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Unadilla has a value of 13.9% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Vienna

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Vienna

16.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Vienna has a value of 16.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Vienna has a value of 16.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Vienna has a value of 16.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Warwick

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Warwick

16.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Warwick has a value of 16.7% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Warwick has a value of 16.7% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Warwick has a value of 16.7% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Place (City): Webster County

Current Value:
15.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Census Places, Webster County has a value of 15.5% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.5% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 16.1%.
GA Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 620 locales.
Compared to U.S. Census Places, Webster County has a value of 15.5% which is in the worst 25% of census places (cities). Census places (cities) in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.0% while census places (cities) in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Census Places
The distribution is based on data from 27,528 U.S. Census Places.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), Webster County has a value of 15.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31007

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31007

19.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31007 has a value of 19.1% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31007 has a value of 19.1% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31007 has a value of 19.1% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31041

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31041

22.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31041 has a value of 22.5% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31041 has a value of 22.5% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31041 has a value of 22.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31051

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31051

14.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31051 has a value of 14.2% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31051 has a value of 14.2% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31051 has a value of 14.2% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31057

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31057

19.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31057 has a value of 19.2% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31057 has a value of 19.2% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31057 has a value of 19.2% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31058

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31058

14.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31058 has a value of 14.7% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31058 has a value of 14.7% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31058 has a value of 14.7% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31063

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31063

18.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31063 has a value of 18.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31063 has a value of 18.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31063 has a value of 18.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31068

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31068

15.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31068 has a value of 15.7% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31068 has a value of 15.7% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31068 has a value of 15.7% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31070

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31070

14.4%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31070 has a value of 14.4% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31070 has a value of 14.4% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31070 has a value of 14.4% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31091

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31091

14.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31091 has a value of 14.7% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31091 has a value of 14.7% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31091 has a value of 14.7% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31092

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31092

16.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31092 has a value of 16.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31092 has a value of 16.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31092 has a value of 16.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31701

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31701

19.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31701 has a value of 19.9% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31701 has a value of 19.9% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31701 has a value of 19.9% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31705

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31705

16.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31705 has a value of 16.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31705 has a value of 16.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31705 has a value of 16.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31707

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31707

14.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31707 has a value of 14.1% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31707 has a value of 14.1% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31707 has a value of 14.1% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31709

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31709

13.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31709 has a value of 13.6% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31709 has a value of 13.6% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31709 has a value of 13.6% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31711

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31711

15.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31711 has a value of 15.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31711 has a value of 15.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31711 has a value of 15.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31716

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31716

15.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31716 has a value of 15.8% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31716 has a value of 15.8% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31716 has a value of 15.8% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31719

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31719

16.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31719 has a value of 16.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31719 has a value of 16.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31719 has a value of 16.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31721

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31721

12.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31721 has a value of 12.2% which is in the best 50% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31721 has a value of 12.2% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31721 has a value of 12.2% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31730

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31730

16.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31730 has a value of 16.9% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31730 has a value of 16.9% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31730 has a value of 16.9% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31735

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31735

15.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31735 has a value of 15.6% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31735 has a value of 15.6% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31735 has a value of 15.6% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31743

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31743

17.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31743 has a value of 17.8% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31743 has a value of 17.8% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31743 has a value of 17.8% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31763

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31763

10.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31763 has a value of 10.0% which is in the best 50% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31763 has a value of 10.0% which is in the best 50% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31763 has a value of 10.0% which is lower and better.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31764

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31764

15.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31764 has a value of 15.6% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31764 has a value of 15.6% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31764 has a value of 15.6% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31772

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31772

15.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31772 has a value of 15.7% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31772 has a value of 15.7% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31772 has a value of 15.7% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31779

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31779

15.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31779 has a value of 15.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31779 has a value of 15.0% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31779 has a value of 15.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31780

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31780

16.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31780 has a value of 16.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31780 has a value of 16.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31780 has a value of 16.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31781

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31781

14.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31781 has a value of 14.3% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31781 has a value of 14.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31781 has a value of 14.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31784

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31784

16.4%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31784 has a value of 16.4% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31784 has a value of 16.4% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31784 has a value of 16.4% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31787

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31787

15.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31787 has a value of 15.0% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31787 has a value of 15.0% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31787 has a value of 15.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31789

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31789

15.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31789 has a value of 15.2% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31789 has a value of 15.2% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31789 has a value of 15.2% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31791

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31791

14.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31791 has a value of 14.1% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31791 has a value of 14.1% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31791 has a value of 14.1% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31796

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31796

15.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31796 has a value of 15.6% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31796 has a value of 15.6% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31796 has a value of 15.6% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31801

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31801

14.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31801 has a value of 14.8% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31801 has a value of 14.8% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31801 has a value of 14.8% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31803

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31803

16.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31803 has a value of 16.1% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31803 has a value of 16.1% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31803 has a value of 16.1% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31806

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31806

13.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31806 has a value of 13.6% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31806 has a value of 13.6% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31806 has a value of 13.6% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31814

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31814

23.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31814 has a value of 23.6% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31814 has a value of 23.6% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31814 has a value of 23.6% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31815

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31815

16.2%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31815 has a value of 16.2% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31815 has a value of 16.2% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31815 has a value of 16.2% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31821

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31821

22.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31821 has a value of 22.0% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31821 has a value of 22.0% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31821 has a value of 22.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31824

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31824

15.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31824 has a value of 15.5% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31824 has a value of 15.5% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31824 has a value of 15.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31825

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31825

18.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31825 has a value of 18.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31825 has a value of 18.3% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31825 has a value of 18.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31832

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 31832

18.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 31832 has a value of 18.5% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 31832 has a value of 18.5% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 31832 has a value of 18.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 39826

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 39826

18.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 39826 has a value of 18.1% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 39826 has a value of 18.1% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 39826 has a value of 18.1% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 39842

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 39842

18.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 39842 has a value of 18.9% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 39842 has a value of 18.9% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 39842 has a value of 18.9% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 39877

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 39877

16.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 39877 has a value of 16.9% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 39877 has a value of 16.9% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 39877 has a value of 16.9% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 39885

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Zip Code: 39885

13.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to GA Zip Codes, 39885 has a value of 13.5% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 13.0% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 15.1%.
GA Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 728 Georgia zip codes.
Compared to U.S. Zip Codes, 39885 has a value of 13.5% which is in the worst 25% of zip codes. Zip codes in the best 50% have a value lower than 11.1% while zip codes in the worst 25% have a value higher than 13.1%.
U.S. Zip Codes
The distribution is based on data from 31,435 U.S. zip codes.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 39885 has a value of 13.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13093970100

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13093970100

14.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13093970100 has a value of 14.7% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13093970100 has a value of 14.7% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13093970200

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13093970200

17.4%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13093970200 has a value of 17.4% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13093970200 has a value of 17.4% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13093970300

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13093970300

16.3%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13093970300 has a value of 16.3% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13093970300 has a value of 16.3% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000100

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000100

16.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095000100 has a value of 16.7% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095000100 has a value of 16.7% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000200

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000200

23.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095000200 has a value of 23.6% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095000200 has a value of 23.6% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000400

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000400

12.5%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095000400 has a value of 12.5% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095000400 has a value of 12.5% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000501

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000501

8.8%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095000501 has a value of 8.8% which is in the best 50% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095000501 has a value of 8.8% which is lower and better.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000502

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000502

11.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095000502 has a value of 11.1% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095000502 has a value of 11.1% which is lower and better.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000600

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000600

13.4%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095000600 has a value of 13.4% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095000600 has a value of 13.4% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000700

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000700

10.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095000700 has a value of 10.9% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095000700 has a value of 10.9% which is lower and better.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000800

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000800

20.7%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095000800 has a value of 20.7% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095000800 has a value of 20.7% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000900

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095000900

15.4%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095000900 has a value of 15.4% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095000900 has a value of 15.4% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095001000

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095001000

12.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095001000 has a value of 12.6% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095001000 has a value of 12.6% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095001100

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095001100

21.1%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095001100 has a value of 21.1% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095001100 has a value of 21.1% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095001403

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095001403

22.9%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095001403 has a value of 22.9% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095001403 has a value of 22.9% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095001500

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095001500

23.6%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095001500 has a value of 23.6% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095001500 has a value of 23.6% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095010302

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095010302

19.0%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095010302 has a value of 19.0% which is in the worst 25% of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095010302 has a value of 19.0% which is higher and worse.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095010401

Current Value:

Adults with Diabetes Census Tract: 13095010401

10.4%
(2021)
Compared to:
Compared to U.S. Census Tracts, 13095010401 has a value of 10.4% which is in the 2nd worst quartile of census tracts. Census tracts in the best 50% have a value lower than 10.3% while census tracts in the worst 25% have a value higher than 12.8%.
U.S. Census Tracts
The distribution is based on data from 68,167 U.S. census tracts.
Compared to the US Value (11.3%), 13095010401 has a value of 10.4% which is lower and better.
US Value
(11.3%)
The regional value is compared to the national value.