ZIP code
50014
in Ames, IowaPopulation 32,958
54.85/ 100
Ranked #9,628 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 30%)
Ranked #274 of 922 Iowa ZIPs (top 30%)
Ranked #15 of 19 Ames, IA ZIPs (bottom 21%)
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.
Binge drinking
24.2%
in the top 0.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›High cholesterol
27.1%
in the bottom 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
23.1%
in the bottom 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
6.5%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
3.7%
in the bottom 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Stroke
1.9%
in the bottom 2.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
7.7%
in the bottom 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
36.6%
in the bottom 4.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS4thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Home broadband subscription
69.8%
in the bottom 6.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST3rdUS6thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›Fatal road crashes
1.8 per 100,000 residents per year
in the bottom 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 50014, one of several in Ames, Iowa, overall, ranks in the top 30% healthiest ZIPs nationally (9,628th) and the top 30% of Iowa (274th).
Reading the numbers as a whole, the picture lands somewhere in between: modeled high cholesterol sits in the bottom 1.7% nationally, high blood pressure lands in the bottom 2.0% nationally, and diabetes lies in the bottom 1.9% nationally. Modeled coronary heart disease stands in the bottom 2.5% nationally, stroke rests in the bottom 2.0% nationally, and mobility disability registers in the bottom 2.7% nationally. Fatal road crashes resides in the bottom 6.3% nationally. On the other side, modeled binge drinking settles in the top 0.7% nationally, and homeownership is in the bottom 4.5% nationally. Home broadband subscription sits in the bottom 6.0% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. ZIP 50010, just across the boundary, comes out healthier overall.
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 Ames, IA 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 97%
21%
Disability
healthier than 72%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 90%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 45%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 33%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 12%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 18%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
in the top 0.5%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 64%
11%
Disability
healthier than 71%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 96%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 53%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 38%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 27%
14%
Preventive Care
in the bottom 1.0%
13%
Mental Health
in the bottom 0.7%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 94%
21%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 11%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 33%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 6%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 22%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 6%
8%
Disability
healthier than 11%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 22%
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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 21.4; chronic-disease standing 97.3 (top 10%) — 76 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,913 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
50010
Iowashares a border
Score 59.95
Closest healthier
50012
Iowashares a border
Score 54.87
Similar health profile
23551
Virginia98% similar profile
Score 57.09
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 | 14.7% | 13.0–16.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 23.1% | 20.4–25.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 4.6% | 4.2–5.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.3% | 9.1–11.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.6% | 4.1–5.1 |
| Depression among adults | 23.8% | 20.6–26.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 6.5% | 5.7–7.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 27.1% | 24.2–29.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 31.9% | 26.7–36.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 1.9% | 1.7–2.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.3% | 9.3–13.5 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.7% | 6.4–8.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 60.1% | 57.8–62.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.3% | 68.4–75.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 70.2% | 67.5–73.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.3% | 65.9–74.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 61.0% | 57.4–64.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.4% | 70.5–82.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 24.2% | 20.7–27.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.0% | 10.3–13.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.1% | 18.7–25.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 29.8% | 24.9–34.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.9% | 14.8–19.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.5% | 18.2–22.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.4% | 9.1–11.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.4% | 16.4–20.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 28.9% | 25.3–32.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.2% | 4.6–5.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.2% | 8.2–10.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 7.7% | 6.8–8.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.7% | 2.4–2.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.8% | 4.3–5.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 22.3% | 19.4–25.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.7% | 15.1–20.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 15.4% | 13.2–17.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.5% | 9.8–13.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.7% | 10.2–13.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 37.7% | 33.3–42.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.7% | 7.4–9.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | IA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 29.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.5% (2.7–19.1%) n=931 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 5.4% (0.7–14.7%) n=931 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.1% (1.6–12.9%) n=932 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 68.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.9% (9.8–36.8%) n=932 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.1% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.2% (0.0–6.7%) n=932 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.4% (0.0–7.9%) n=931 |
| Broadband subscription | 69.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.5% (77.9–95.1%) n=931 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 37.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 18.2% (9.0–28.8%) n=931 |
| Homeownership rate | 36.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 82.1% (66.8–93.5%) n=931 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.4% (0.0–3.3%) n=931 |
| Foreign-born population | 12.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.0% (0.0–7.2%) n=932 |
| Single-parent households | 56.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.8% (43.7–75.5%) n=928 |
| Population 65+ | 10.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–31.0%) n=932 |
| Median age | 23.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.7 yr (34.1–54.7) n=931 |
| Median household income | $60,731 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $73,848 ($55,055–$102,762) n=911 |
| Median home value | $336,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $161,100 ($93,820–$278,170) n=892 |
| Median gross rent | $1,065 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $825 ($614–$1,113) n=771 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | IA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
More ZIPs to explore ▾More ZIPs to explore ▴
How these lists were built: they draw only from ZIPs that have a published Score, so ZIPs with too little data to score are not listed. Distance-based lists use distance between ZIP boundaries with no state filter, so an out-of-state ZIP can appear. Statistically similar means a close match across the nine Score domains, not a demographic match: the measure is the cosine similarity between two ZIPs’ domain scores, taken over the domains both ZIPs have data for and only where that overlap covers at least six of the nine — and where no ZIP clears that minimum-overlap floor, that list is left out rather than filled with a weak match. How distance is measured