ZIP code
53188
in Waukesha, WisconsinPopulation 34,892
59.06/ 100
Ranked #5,551 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 17%)
Ranked #122 of 763 Wisconsin ZIPs (top 16%)
Ranked #45 of 80 Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI ZIPs (bottom 44%)
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
21.4%
in the top 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Mammography
83%
in the top 2.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.17 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Lithium in drinking water
10 µg/L
in the bottom 7.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST19thUS7thDefinition & 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 ›Fatal road crashes
2.6 per 100,000 residents per year
in the bottom 8.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS9thDefinition & 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 ›Dental provider access
0.87 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The number of dental 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 ›Loud transportation noise
1.6%
in the top 10.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS90thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
6.6%
in the bottom 6.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 53188, one of several in Waukesha, Wisconsin, overall, ranks in the top 17% healthiest ZIPs nationally (5,551st) and the top 16% of Wisconsin (122nd).
This area's measures are easy to read as a mixed set: modeled mammography rests in the top 2.4% nationally. Distance to an emergency room registers at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Mental-health providers resides in the top 5.6% nationally, and lithium in drinking water settles in the bottom 7.3% nationally. Fatal road crashes is in the bottom 8.9% nationally, and dental providers sits in the top 9.1% nationally. Set against that, modeled binge drinking lands in the top 2.5% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden lies in the top 3.7% nationally. Modeled expected annual loss stands in the top 4.8% nationally, and loud transportation noise rests in the top 10.2% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, 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. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. ZIP 53018, 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 Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI 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 79%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 89%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 86%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 81%
8%
Disability
healthier than 83%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 76%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 54%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 1%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 89%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 77%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 72%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 89%
8%
Disability
healthier than 86%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.2%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 71%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 61%
8%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 49%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 44%
13%
Disability
healthier than 50%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 60%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 1%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 39%
11%
“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
2 of our published findings list 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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 78.2 ± 1.0 years. A median household income of $92,409 predicts 79.8 years — 1.5 years below.
Ranked #1,868 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 1.5 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 78.5 — 77 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,982 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
53018
Wisconsinshares a border
Score 66.96
Closest healthier
53072
Wisconsinshares a border
Score 63.31
Similar health profile
51108
Iowa98% similar profile
Score 55.56
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 | 25.5% | 23.3–27.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.8% | 30.2–35.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.7% | 8.0–9.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.6% | 9.5–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.0% | 5.4–6.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.4% | 4.8–6.0 |
| Depression among adults | 21.3% | 18.8–24.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.5% | 9.3–11.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.2% | 31.3–37.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.4% | 31.4–40.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.9% | 2.7–3.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.6% | 5.6–8.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.1% | 6.1–8.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.7% | 74.1–79.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.3% | 75.4–81.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.0% | 85.5–88.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 71.8% | 68.8–75.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 71.8% | 69.6–74.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 83.0% | 79.0–87.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 21.4% | 18.6–24.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.6% | 10.1–13.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.6% | 19.8–25.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.1% | 28.8–36.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.2% | 13.5–17.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.2% | 12.7–15.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.1% | 10.9–13.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.7% | 10.5–13.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.5% | 24.7–30.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.7–7.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.9% | 6.2–7.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.8% | 10.5–13.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.0% | 2.8–3.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.8% | 3.5–4.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 17.0% | 14.8–19.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.8% | 8.3–11.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.4% | 8.2–10.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.4% | 7.3–9.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.7% | 5.1–6.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.8% | 26.4–33.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.8% | 4.1–5.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | WI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.5% (3.6–16.0%) n=765 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 6.7% (2.4–14.9%) n=764 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.9% (2.3–12.6%) n=768 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 43.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 23.5% (12.7–44.0%) n=768 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.6% (0.9–5.6%) n=763 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.8–9.0%) n=764 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.8% (80.0–94.8%) n=764 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 30.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 21.8% (14.7–29.1%) n=764 |
| Homeownership rate | 67.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 81.3% (62.1–91.8%) n=764 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–3.7%) n=764 |
| Foreign-born population | 6.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.3–6.8%) n=768 |
| Single-parent households | 55.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 59.0% (47.7–72.8%) n=762 |
| Population 65+ | 17.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.4% (13.9–32.2%) n=768 |
| Median age | 40.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 44.2 yr (36.2–56.1) n=765 |
| Median household income | $92,409 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $75,147 ($57,542–$101,625) n=755 |
| Median home value | $348,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $231,900 ($160,140–$367,300) n=755 |
| Median gross rent | $1,268 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $914 ($696–$1,261) n=706 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | WI median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 78.2 yr ± 0.51 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.4 yr (77.7–83.6) n=712 |
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 0.51 years of 78.2, 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