ZIP code
52403
in Cedar Rapids, IowaPopulation 22,551
56.93/ 100
Ranked #7,345 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 23%)
Ranked #143 of 922 Iowa ZIPs (top 16%)
Ranked #20 of 46 Cedar Rapids, IA ZIPs (top 43%)
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
110 µg/L
in the top 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 6.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
19.8%
in the top 7.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST52ndUS93rdDefinition & 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
81.6%
in the top 4.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Physician access
1.9 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ offices located 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 ›Transit access
3.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 11.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS89thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Outer-floodplain exposure
2.9%
in the top 11.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS89thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 0.2%-annual-chance flood band — the “500-year” zone, a lower but real 1-in-500 yearly chance.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Mental-health provider access
0.087 per 1,000 residents
in the top 12.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS88thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics located 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 12.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS88thDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 52403, one of several in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on the composite measure, lands in the top 23% healthiest ZIPs nationally (7,345th) and the top 16% of Iowa (143rd).
The readings split fairly evenly between strengths and concerns: distance to an emergency room stands at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Modeled mammography is in the top 4.9% nationally, physicians rests in the top 7.8% nationally, and transit sits in the top 8.1% nationally. Distance to a community health center registers at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Working the other way, lithium in drinking water lands in the top 1.9% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden resides in the top 6.6% nationally. Modeled binge drinking lies in the top 7.0% nationally, and expected annual loss settles in the top 11.4% nationally. Outer-floodplain exposure stands in the top 11.5% nationally.
Set against the neighboring ZIPs, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In everyday language, lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 52227, 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. Compare it against the US, this state and the Cedar Rapids, 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 69%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 80%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 61%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 60%
8%
Disability
healthier than 75%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 39%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 80%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 92%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 78%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 87%
11%
Disability
healthier than 76%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 19%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 16%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 19%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 78%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 71%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 87%
11%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 56%
21%
Disability
healthier than 51%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 11%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 28%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 16%
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 17.8; chronic-disease standing 68.7 — 51 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #14,479 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
52227
Iowashares a border
Score 63.04
Closest healthier
52302
Iowashares a border
Score 61.91
Similar health profile
29369
South Carolina99% similar profile
Score 55.77
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 | 27.9% | 25.4–30.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.5% | 29.6–35.5 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.3% | 8.5–10.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.5% | 9.4–11.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.5% | 5.8–7.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.7% | 6.0–7.6 |
| Depression among adults | 23.0% | 20.3–25.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.7% | 10.3–13.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.1% | 32.0–38.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.7% | 31.5–40.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 3.0–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.9% | 8.0–12.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.0% | 5.0–7.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.2% | 76.5–81.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.0% | 76.2–81.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.0% | 84.4–87.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.6% | 65.4–73.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.8% | 65.9–71.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 81.6% | 75.8–86.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 19.8% | 17.2–22.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.1% | 11.4–15.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.2% | 19.3–25.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 31.7% | 27.7–35.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.3% | 14.3–18.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.7% | 14.0–17.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.4% | 11.0–13.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.7% | 11.3–14.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.9% | 24.8–31.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.1% | 6.3–7.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.3% | 10.8–13.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.3% | 3.0–3.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.4% | 20.6–26.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.3% | 9.7–13.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.4% | 8.0–10.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.8% | 7.6–10.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.4% | 5.6–7.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.2% | 28.8–35.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.5% | 5.6–7.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | IA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 7.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.5% (2.7–19.1%) n=931 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 5.4% (0.7–14.7%) n=931 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.1% (1.6–12.9%) n=932 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 40.9% | 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 | 6.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.4% (0.0–7.9%) n=931 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.5% (77.9–95.1%) n=931 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 18.2% (9.0–28.8%) n=931 |
| Homeownership rate | 77.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 82.1% (66.8–93.5%) n=931 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.4% (0.0–3.3%) n=931 |
| Foreign-born population | 2.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.0% (0.0–7.2%) n=932 |
| Single-parent households | 58.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 56.8% (43.7–75.5%) n=928 |
| Population 65+ | 25.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.2% (12.7–31.0%) n=932 |
| Median age | 45.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.7 yr (34.1–54.7) n=931 |
| Median household income | $74,703 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $73,848 ($55,055–$102,762) n=911 |
| Median home value | $206,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $161,100 ($93,820–$278,170) n=892 |
| Median gross rent | $870 | $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 | 80.6 yr ± 0.85 | 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 0.85 years of 80.6, 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