ZIP code
64058
in Sugar Creek, MissouriPopulation 6,660
45.11/ 100
Ranked #22,297 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 30%)
Ranked #426 of 993 Missouri ZIPs (top 43%)
Ranked #148 of 200 Kansas City, MO-KS ZIPs (bottom 26%)
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.
Distance to a Superfund site
0.4 mi
in the bottom 5.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST4thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Superfund site — an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has listed for cleanup.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Outer-floodplain exposure
4.3%
in the top 8.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Floodplain exposure
31.7%
in the top 9.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
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 ›Binge drinking
18.5%
in the top 14.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS85thDefinition & 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 ›Radon
2.5 pCi/L
in the top 20% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS80thDefinition & 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
37.7%
in the top 25% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS75thDefinition & 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 ›The read
In its overall standing, ZIP 64058, one of several in Sugar Creek, Missouri lands in the bottom 30% nationally (22,297th) and the top 43% of Missouri (426th).
This area's measures are easy to read as a mixed set: unemployment lies in the bottom 19% nationally. Set against that, distance to a Superfund site stands in the bottom 5.0% nationally, modeled industrial-pollution burden rests in the top 6.3% nationally, and outer-floodplain exposure registers in the top 8.4% nationally. Floodplain exposure resides in the top 9.2% nationally. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility settles at the national minimum, shared with about 31% of ZIPs. Modeled binge drinking is in the top 14.9% nationally, and extreme heat sits in the top 18% nationally. Modeled cognitive disability lands in the top 19% nationally, and radon lies in the top 20% nationally.
Against the wider neighborhood, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put simply, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility is a plant handling large amounts of hazardous chemicals that must file an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases. On the overall standing, ZIP 64016, just across the boundary, ranks healthier.
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 Kansas City, MO-KS metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 63%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 58%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 55%
16%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 16%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 31%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 23%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 11%
8%
Disability
healthier than 40%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 15%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 80%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 61%
16%
Disability
healthier than 70%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 68%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 54%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 15%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 37%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 8%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 8%
5%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 48%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 40%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 47%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 35%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 27%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 26%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 9%
8%
Disability
healthier than 33%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 7%
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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 76.0 ± 1.6 years. A median household income of $82,192 predicts 79.3 years — 3.3 years below.
Ranked #4,481 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
64016
Missourishares a border
Score 49.65
Closest healthier
64068
Missourishares a border
Score 56.20
Similar health profile
64722
Missouri97% similar profile
Score 44.51
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 | 28.2% | 25.8–30.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.4% | 31.6–37.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.4% | 7.6–9.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.6% | 9.5–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.5% | 5.8–7.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.1% | 7.0–9.3 |
| Depression among adults | 27.3% | 24.4–30.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.2% | 9.8–12.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 40.3% | 37.2–43.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.4% | 31.5–39.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.5% | 3.1–3.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.9% | 11.4–16.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.4% | 7.6–11.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.0% | 72.1–77.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.9% | 73.0–78.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.1% | 82.0–86.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 64.1% | 60.1–68.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 62.1% | 58.9–65.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.6% | 68.6–80.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.5% | 16.1–21.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.3% | 14.7–20.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 29.9% | 26.1–33.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.4% | 30.8–38.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.8% | 18.2–23.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.8% | 17.7–22.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.7% | 13.0–16.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.2% | 16.0–20.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 37.0% | 33.1–40.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.1% | 7.3–9.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.4% | 8.2–10.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 16.0% | 13.9–18.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.9% | 3.4–4.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.3–5.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 22.6% | 19.6–25.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.7% | 11.4–16.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.5% | 7.8–11.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.9% | 11.0–14.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.4% | 7.3–9.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.1% | 29.4–36.6 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.9% | 7.7–10.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MO median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.3% (3.2–26.0%) n=1,009 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.2% (3.5–28.4%) n=1,006 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.5% (2.5–20.5%) n=1,009 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 19.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.1% (7.2–40.2%) n=1,009 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.5%) n=1,003 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.1% (0.0–11.9%) n=1,009 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.3% (72.7–95.2%) n=1,009 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 18.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.7% (8.4–33.9%) n=1,009 |
| Homeownership rate | 79.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 79.4% (56.0–94.3%) n=1,009 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–5.1%) n=1,009 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.8% (0.0–6.4%) n=1,010 |
| Single-parent households | 52.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 55.0% (39.5–75.6%) n=1,005 |
| Population 65+ | 15.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.2% (11.7–31.1%) n=1,010 |
| Median age | 42.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.5 yr (33.3–55.9) n=1,005 |
| Median household income | $82,192 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,740 ($42,457–$95,231) n=948 |
| Median home value | $204,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $174,150 ($91,880–$309,500) n=930 |
| Median gross rent | $1,369 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $813 ($553–$1,265) n=786 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MO median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 76.0 yr ± 0.80 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 77.6 yr (74.6–81.0) n=995 |
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 0.80 years of 76.0, 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