Skip to main content
ZipVitals

ZIP code

51240

in Inwood, IowaPopulation 1,914

55.29/ 100

Ranked #9,102 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 28%)

Ranked #247 of 922 Iowa ZIPs (top 27%)

Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.

Robust across all 9 health domains

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.

Radon

5 pCi/L

in the top 0.3% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST95th
US99th
Definition & 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 ›

Grocery access

0.55 per 1,000 residents

in the top 1.3% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST99th
US99th
Definition & source ›

The number of full supermarkets inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.

Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”

Full methodology ›

Binge drinking

21.8%

in the top 2.0% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST91st
US98th
Definition & 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 ›

Arsenic in groundwater

33.7%

in the top 2.5% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST94th
US98th
Definition & source ›

The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.

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 ›

PFAS in drinking water

7.6%

in the bottom 4.4% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST12th
US4th
Definition & 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 ›

Recreation access

1.1 per 1,000 residents

in the top 7.2% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST90th
US93rd
Definition & source ›

The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.

Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.

Full methodology ›

Nitrate in drinking water

0.43%

in the top 7.4% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST89th
US93rd
Definition & source ›

The modeled share of this area’s domestic-well groundwater at or above the federal nitrate limit of 10 milligrams per liter.

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 ›

Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance

1.1%

in the top 8.6% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST97th
US91st
Definition & source ›

The share of days in the year when modeled fine-particle (PM2.5) pollution was above the EPA’s daily limit of 35 micrograms per cubic meter.

Full methodology ›

Child-care access

0.55 per 1,000 residents

in the top 8.7% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST85th
US91st
Definition & source ›

The number of child day-care services inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.

Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.

Full methodology ›

Walkability

2.3 intersections/sq mi

in the bottom 9.3% nationally

Higher is healthier

ST5th
US9th
Definition & source ›

The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.

Full methodology ›

Cross-source signals

Combined exposures in this ZIP

More than one environmental exposure stands out in this ZIP. Each is established independently and shown on its own above; they are grouped here for context — not because one causes the other.

  • USGS models a high likelihood that groundwater arsenic here exceeds 10 µg/L — the level EPA sets as the limit for public water systems — and this area's modeled radon runs above EPA's 4 pCi/L action level.

    See the full radon & arsenic analysis →

The read

Inwood, Iowa (ZIP 51240), by its composite score, sits in the top 28% healthiest ZIPs nationally (9,102nd) and the top 27% of Iowa (247th).

continue reading

The measures fall on both sides for this area, fairly evenly: grocery settles in the top 1.3% nationally, and modeled pfas sits in the bottom 4.4% nationally. Recreation lies in the top 7.2% nationally, and childcare rests in the top 8.7% nationally. Pulling the other way, modeled radon resides in the top 0.3% nationally, binge drinking is in the top 2.0% nationally, and arsenic lands in the top 2.5% nationally. Modeled nitrate stands in the top 7.4% nationally, modeled fine-particle registers in the top 8.6% nationally, and walkability settles in the bottom 9.3% nationally.

Next to the surrounding area, grocery runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, radon is a radioactive soil gas the EPA identifies as the top cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. 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. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 51247, just across the boundary.

What’s driving this score

Nine domains make up the ZipVitals Score — here is how this ZIP does on each, and how much each one counts.

Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.

Compare within

Lifting this score

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 73%

21%

Preventive Care

healthier than 72%

13%

Mental Health

healthier than 76%

8%

Disability

healthier than 74%

7%

About typical

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 43%

16%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 42%

11%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 56%

5%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 51%

5%

Holding it back

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 10%

14%

Lifting this score

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 87%

21%

Disability

healthier than 74%

7%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 84%

5%

About typical

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 54%

16%

Preventive Care

healthier than 43%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 58%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 59%

8%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 54%

5%

Holding it back

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 8%

14%

“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 10.1; chronic-disease standing 73.3 — 63 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.

    Ranked #15,724 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.

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
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Arthritis among adults26.2%23.2–29.3
High blood pressure among adults33.8%30.0–37.6
Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults9.2%8.2–10.1
Current asthma among adults9.7%8.6–10.9
Coronary heart disease among adults6.4%5.7–7.3
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults6.6%5.7–7.6
Depression among adults19.7%16.8–22.8
Diagnosed diabetes among adults10.4%9.0–12.0
High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened34.6%30.6–38.6
Obesity among adults37.0%29.9–44.6
Stroke among adults3.2%2.9–3.6
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years10.2%8.3–12.3
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years6.7%5.5–8.0
Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure77.6%74.8–80.2
Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults76.9%73.3–80.2
Cholesterol screening among adults84.4%82.3–86.4
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years69.6%64.9–73.7
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults69.8%66.6–72.7
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years81.0%74.4–86.0
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Binge drinking among adults21.8%18.5–25.4
Current cigarette smoking among adults14.4%12.1–16.9
No leisure-time physical activity among adults24.4%20.4–28.8
Short sleep duration among adults30.4%24.9–35.8
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults16.6%14.3–19.2
Frequent mental distress among adults16.2%14.3–18.3
Frequent physical distress among adults12.3%10.8–14.0
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Cognitive disability among adults13.3%11.6–15.1
Any disability among adults28.3%24.5–32.3
Hearing disability among adults7.6%6.7–8.6
Independent living disability among adults7.1%6.2–8.1
Mobility disability among adults12.4%10.5–14.4
Self-care disability among adults3.1%2.7–3.5
Vision disability among adults3.9%3.4–4.4
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Lack of social and emotional support among adults23.2%19.7–27.0
Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults9.9%8.1–12.0
Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults8.0%6.5–9.7
Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults8.1%6.7–9.7
Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults5.9%5.0–6.9
Loneliness among adults32.5%27.7–37.6
Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults5.4%4.5–6.4
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)IA median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate3.0%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,3648.5% (2.7–19.1%) n=931
Uninsured 18–643.3%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,2865.4% (0.7–14.7%) n=931
No HS diploma (25+)8.1%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,5055.1% (1.6–12.9%) n=932
Bachelor's or higher (25+)16.5%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50520.9% (9.8–36.8%) n=932
Unemployment rate (16+)1.4%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2742.2% (0.0–6.7%) n=932
Households without a vehicle4.7%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3222.4% (0.0–7.9%) n=931
Broadband subscription96.0%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32288.5% (77.9–95.1%) n=931
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)13.1%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32218.2% (9.0–28.8%) n=931
Homeownership rate86.9%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32282.1% (66.8–93.5%) n=931
Crowded housing (>1 per room)1.3%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3220.4% (0.0–3.3%) n=931
Foreign-born population3.8%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,5531.0% (0.0–7.2%) n=932
Single-parent households40.6%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08756.8% (43.7–75.5%) n=928
Population 65+19.6%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55320.2% (12.7–31.0%) n=932
Median age34.4 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29242.7 yr (34.1–54.7) n=931
Median household income$83,929$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$73,848 ($55,055–$102,762) n=911
Median home value$232,600$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$161,100 ($93,820–$278,170) n=892
Median gross rent$993$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$825 ($614–$1,113) n=771
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)IA median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy at birth81.8 yr ± 1.0978.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,30880.0 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 1.09 years of 81.8, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.

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