ZIP code
46259
in Indianapolis, IndianaPopulation 15,169
60.38/ 100
Ranked #4,566 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 14.3%)
Ranked #28 of 757 Indiana ZIPs (top 3.7%)
Ranked #22 of 115 Indianapolis-Carmel-Greenwood, IN ZIPs (top 19%)
Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.
What defines this ZIP
Metrics where this ZIP sits in the tails of the national distribution — the ones that most set it apart. Select any tile for its definition and methodology.
Lithium in drinking water
9.6 µg/L
in the bottom 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Median household income
$129,345
in the top 7.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
19.9%
in the top 6.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›Mammography
81.5%
in the top 5.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
95.5%
in the top 8.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
5.1%
in the bottom 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
7.3%
in the bottom 9.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Lead in tap water
5.1 ppb
in the top 9.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
US90thDefinition & source ›
The lead level at the 90th percentile of tap-water samples reported by the public water systems serving this ZIP, in parts per billion — the EPA requires action above 15 ppb.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.8%
in the bottom 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS9thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
5.9%
in the bottom 8.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 46259, one of several in Indianapolis, Indiana, by its overall standing, sits in the top 14.3% healthiest ZIPs nationally (4,566th) and the top 3.7% of Indiana (28th).
Several readings land clearly in this area's favor and shape the picture: lithium in drinking water stands in the bottom 4.0% nationally, household income lands in the top 7.1% nationally, and modeled mammography is in the top 5.2% nationally. Homeownership resides in the top 8.0% nationally, modeled transportation rests in the bottom 8.7% nationally, and modeled housing insecurity lies in the bottom 9.5% nationally. Modeled energy burden sits in the bottom 8.7% nationally. Set against that, modeled binge drinking settles in the top 6.6% nationally, and lead in tap water registers in the top 9.8% nationally. Modeled arsenic stands in the top 11.1% nationally.
Held up against its neighbors, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 46204, about 7.9 miles away.
What’s driving this score
Nine domains make up the ZipVitals Score — here is how this ZIP does on each, and how much each one counts. Compare it against the US, this state and the Indianapolis-Carmel-Greenwood, IN metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 77%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 90%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 85%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 67%
11%
Disability
healthier than 90%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 74%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 47%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 46%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 54%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 95%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 66%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 92%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 89%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 86%
8%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 73%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 39%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 85%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 79%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 88%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 81%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 72%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 66%
8%
Disability
healthier than 83%
7%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 55%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 37%
5%
“Share” is how much of this ZIP’s score the domain accounts for. Percentages are rounded; higher is healthier in every domain. How the score works, and who it compares you with ›
Findings that name this ZIP
One of our published findings lists this ZIP code. Each finding compares one published measure against a stated benchmark, and names only the ZIP codes whose estimates are reliable enough to rank. See all surprising findings.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 80.8 ± 1.9 years. The 47 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 76.7 years — 4.1 years above them.
Ranked #313 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
46110
Indianashares a border
Score 50.06
Closest healthier
46204
Indianaabout 7.9 mi away
Score 62.11
Similar health profile
24015
Virginia99% similar profile
Score 57.96
How these were chosen: only ZIPs with a published Score appear — a nearby ZIP with too little data to score won’t. Nearby means closest by distance between ZIP boundaries, which can cross state lines. A similar health profile is a close match across the nine Score domains, not similar demographics. Distances are measured between ZIP boundaries — ZIPs that touch share a border. How distance is measured
Evidence
Every measure this page draws on, by source. Collapsed by default — the full data stays in the page for search engines either way.
Health OutcomesCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Arthritis among adults | 25.7% | 24.0–27.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.6% | 32.5–36.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.5% | 7.8–9.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.7% | 9.8–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–6.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.0% | 5.3–6.9 |
| Depression among adults | 25.7% | 23.7–28.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.1% | 9.1–11.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.4% | 35.2–39.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 32.7% | 30.0–35.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.7% | 2.5–3.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.6% | 6.6–8.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.2% | 5.1–7.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.5% | 74.2–78.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.4% | 77.3–81.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.5% | 87.1–89.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.1% | 65.1–70.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 71.7% | 69.6–73.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 81.5% | 77.7–84.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 19.9% | 17.8–22.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.0% | 10.2–14.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 17.7% | 15.6–20.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.9% | 31.2–36.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 14.7% | 13.1–16.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.4% | 13.9–17.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.5% | 10.4–12.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.8% | 10.4–13.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 24.2% | 21.9–26.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.7% | 5.1–6.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.9% | 5.2–6.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 10.5% | 9.3–11.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.6% | 2.3–3.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.4% | 3.1–3.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.5% | 18.4–22.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.8% | 7.4–10.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 4.5% | 3.6–5.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.3% | 6.2–8.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.1% | 4.4–5.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.4% | 28.9–34.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.6% | 4.8–6.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | IN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 6.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 9.8% (3.3–23.6%) n=764 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 8.3% (2.5–19.0%) n=761 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 8.8% (3.0–19.3%) n=766 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 47.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 19.4% (8.1–38.5%) n=766 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.4% (0.0–8.2%) n=760 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.0–11.5%) n=764 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (76.7–95.9%) n=764 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 12.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.0% (9.8–33.1%) n=764 |
| Homeownership rate | 95.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.7% (58.9–94.5%) n=764 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–4.2%) n=764 |
| Foreign-born population | 8.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.3% (0.0–8.8%) n=767 |
| Single-parent households | 50.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 53.2% (40.5–69.1%) n=756 |
| Population 65+ | 11.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.2% (11.0–26.5%) n=767 |
| Median age | 37.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.5 yr (32.5–49.6) n=756 |
| Median household income | $129,345 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $71,016 ($50,417–$99,531) n=721 |
| Median home value | $342,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $178,250 ($109,430–$287,310) n=724 |
| Median gross rent | $1,220 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $925 ($704–$1,261) n=640 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | IN median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 80.8 yr ± 0.98 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 78.5 yr (75.1–81.5) n=754 |
About the ± — it’s this estimate’s give-or-take (statisticians call it the standard error). The true life expectancy for this ZIP most likely falls within 0.98 years of 80.8, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.
More ZIPs to explore ▾More ZIPs to explore ▴
How these lists were built: they draw only from ZIPs that have a published Score, so ZIPs with too little data to score are not listed. Distance-based lists use distance between ZIP boundaries with no state filter, so an out-of-state ZIP can appear. Statistically similar means a close match across the nine Score domains, not a demographic match: the measure is the cosine similarity between two ZIPs’ domain scores, taken over the domains both ZIPs have data for and only where that overlap covers at least six of the nine — and where no ZIP clears that minimum-overlap floor, that list is left out rather than filled with a weak match. How distance is measured