ZIP code
50148
in Liscomb, IowaPopulation 406
56.42/ 100
Ranked #7,845 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 24%)
Ranked #169 of 922 Iowa ZIPs (top 18%)
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
22.4%
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Fiber broadband
100%
at the national maximum
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Radon
3.3 pCi/L
in the top 6.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST44thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The modeled typical indoor radon level for this area, in picocuries per liter — the EPA recommends fixing a home at 4 pCi/L or above.
Modeled from indoor-radon measurements. In Alaska and Hawaii, where those measurements are not published, a US Geological Survey geologic radon-potential category stands in — a coarser input, disclosed rather than hidden.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
8.0%
in the bottom 4.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST13thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
0.01%
in the bottom 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
4.9%
in the top 10.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST78thUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to an emergency room
13.5 mi
in the top 14.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS86thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare-certified hospital with an emergency room.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
6.3%
in the bottom 12.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS12thDefinition & 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 ›Vision disability
3.4%
in the bottom 8.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
11.0%
in the bottom 14.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS14thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite health measure, Liscomb, Iowa (ZIP 50148) ranks in the top 24% healthiest ZIPs nationally (7,845th) and the top 18% of Iowa (169th).
The picture here is genuinely mixed, with readings on both sides: fiber broadband stands at the national maximum, and modeled pfas lies in the bottom 4.9% nationally. Modeled transportation noise lands in the bottom 5.5% nationally. Households without a vehicle sits at the national minimum, shared with about 16% of ZIPs. Modeled loud transportation noise is at the national minimum, shared with about 22% of ZIPs. Modeled transportation settles in the bottom 11.1% nationally, and poverty resides in the bottom 11.5% nationally. On the other side, modeled binge drinking registers in the top 1.5% nationally, radon rests in the top 6.6% nationally, and arsenic stands in the top 12.0% nationally.
To spell things out, radon is a radioactive soil gas the EPA identifies as the top cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers. Pfas is the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down; here a modeled estimate of the chance a private well contains them. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Close by, ZIP 50621, just across the boundary, ranks 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.
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 74%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 69%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 76%
8%
Disability
healthier than 84%
7%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 43%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 54%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 49%
5%
Holding it back
Risk Behavior
healthier than 35%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 22%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 77%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 61%
8%
Disability
healthier than 90%
7%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 53%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 41%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 55%
5%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 35%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 35%
5%
“Share” is how much of this ZIP’s score the domain accounts for. Percentages are rounded; higher is healthier in every domain. How the score works, and who it compares you with ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
50005
Iowashares a border
Score 55.74
Closest healthier
50621
Iowashares a border
Score 57.07
Similar health profile
17762
Pennsylvania98% similar profile
Score 55.45
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 | 25.6% | 22.5–28.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.7% | 29.0–36.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.8% | 8.0–9.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.4% | 8.3–10.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.1% | 5.4–6.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.1–6.9 |
| Depression among adults | 20.3% | 17.3–23.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.3% | 8.8–11.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.2% | 31.5–39.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 42.3% | 36.0–48.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.0% | 2.6–3.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.9% | 8.8–13.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.0% | 4.8–7.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.9% | 73.6–79.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.7% | 75.2–81.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.9% | 83.8–87.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.0% | 60.8–69.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 69.5% | 66.4–72.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.2% | 73.3–84.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 22.4% | 18.9–26.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 14.4% | 12.0–17.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.8% | 19.1–26.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.4% | 28.2–37.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.4% | 13.1–18.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.7% | 13.8–17.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.0% | 10.4–13.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.4% | 10.8–14.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 25.9% | 22.4–29.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.2% | 6.3–8.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.4–7.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.0% | 9.3–12.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.8% | 2.5–3.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.4% | 3.0–3.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 22.3% | 19.1–25.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.9% | 7.2–10.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.1% | 5.6–8.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.8% | 6.5–9.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.3% | 4.5–6.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.3% | 25.9–34.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.2% | 4.4–6.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | IA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 3.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.5% (2.7–19.1%) n=931 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 12.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 5.4% (0.7–14.7%) n=931 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.1% (1.6–12.9%) n=932 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 28.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 20.9% (9.8–36.8%) n=932 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.2% (0.0–6.7%) n=932 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.4% (0.0–7.9%) n=931 |
| Broadband subscription | 89.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.5% (77.9–95.1%) n=931 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 12.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 18.2% (9.0–28.8%) n=931 |
| Homeownership rate | 86.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 82.1% (66.8–93.5%) n=931 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.4% (0.0–3.3%) n=931 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.0% (0.0–7.2%) n=932 |
| Single-parent households | 67.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.8% (43.7–75.5%) n=928 |
| Population 65+ | 15.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–31.0%) n=932 |
| Median age | 38.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.7 yr (34.1–54.7) n=931 |
| Median household income | $84,083 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $73,848 ($55,055–$102,762) n=911 |
| Median home value | $97,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $161,100 ($93,820–$278,170) n=892 |
| Median gross rent | $1,031 | $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 at birth | 81.5 yr ± 1.52 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.0 yr (77.2–83.4) n=917 |
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 1.52 years of 81.5, 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