ZIP code
64150
in Riverside, MissouriPopulation 4,463
46.27/ 100
Ranked #21,026 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 34%)
Ranked #374 of 993 Missouri ZIPs (top 38%)
Ranked #144 of 200 Kansas City, MO-KS ZIPs (bottom 28%)
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.
Pharmacy access
0.95 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of pharmacies 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
40 per million
in the top 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
82 µg/L
in the top 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Homeownership rate
45.1%
in the bottom 6.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST4thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Outpatient-care access
0.47 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS91stDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient 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 ›Loud transportation noise
1.7%
in the top 9.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Recreation access
0.95 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Physician access
1.4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 12.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS88thDefinition & 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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
0.55%
in the top 17% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS83rdDefinition & 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 ›The read
Riverside, Missouri (ZIP 64150) ranks in the bottom 34% nationally (21,026th) and the top 38% of Missouri (374th).
Several readings make the pressure on this area plain: modeled industrial-pollution burden rests in the top 1.6% nationally, and air-toxics cancer risk lands in the top 4.5% nationally. Lithium in drinking water settles in the top 4.5% nationally, and homeownership rests in the bottom 6.9% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise lands in the top 9.3% nationally. On the encouraging side, pharmacy settles in the top 1.2% nationally, outpatient rests in the top 8.7% nationally, and recreation lands in the top 9.8% nationally. Distance to a community health center settles at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Childcare rests in the top 11.8% nationally.
Against its neighbors, expected annual loss runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 64116, 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 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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 63%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 85%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 58%
16%
Disability
healthier than 46%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.7%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 29%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 30%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 39%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 18%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 84%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 65%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 68%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 71%
8%
Disability
healthier than 78%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 89%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.9%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 33%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 11%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 82%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 53%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 45%
8%
Disability
healthier than 45%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 38%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 7%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 26%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 38%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 11%
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 0.7 (bottom 1%); chronic-disease standing 63.0 — 62 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,632 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
64116
Missourishares a border
Score 49.37
Closest healthier
64151
Missourishares a border
Score 56.76
Similar health profile
77627
Texas92% similar profile
Score 47.82
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% | 22.8–28.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.0% | 32.2–39.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.1% | 6.5–7.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.0% | 5.4–6.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.3% | 6.3–8.3 |
| Depression among adults | 23.5% | 20.2–26.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.8% | 10.2–13.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.2% | 32.4–40.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 41.4% | 34.9–48.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 3.0–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 15.8% | 12.7–19.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.8% | 8.0–11.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.2% | 71.0–76.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.0% | 75.6–82.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.3% | 81.0–85.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 64.4% | 58.5–70.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 55.6% | 51.4–59.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.7% | 65.5–82.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.8% | 13.1–18.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.2% | 13.7–19.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 28.2% | 24.0–32.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.2% | 32.3–46.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.7% | 17.9–23.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.7% | 15.6–19.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.8% | 12.1–15.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.5% | 15.3–19.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.3% | 30.0–38.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.2% | 6.4–8.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.1% | 7.9–10.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.3% | 12.4–16.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.5–4.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.8–6.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.5% | 17.5–23.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.5% | 13.8–19.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 13.7% | 11.3–16.2 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.6% | 12.4–17.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.5–11.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.3% | 25.8–34.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 11.1% | 9.5–12.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MO median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.3% (3.2–26.0%) n=1,009 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 25.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.2% (3.5–28.4%) n=1,006 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.5% (2.5–20.5%) n=1,009 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 36.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.1% (7.2–40.2%) n=1,009 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.1% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.5%) n=1,003 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.1% (0.0–11.9%) n=1,009 |
| Broadband subscription | 90.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.3% (72.7–95.2%) n=1,009 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 29.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.7% (8.4–33.9%) n=1,009 |
| Homeownership rate | 45.1% | 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 | 18.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.8% (0.0–6.4%) n=1,010 |
| Single-parent households | 33.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 55.0% (39.5–75.6%) n=1,005 |
| Population 65+ | 12.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.2% (11.7–31.1%) n=1,010 |
| Median age | 33.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.5 yr (33.3–55.9) n=1,005 |
| Median household income | $58,846 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,740 ($42,457–$95,231) n=948 |
| Median home value | $394,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $174,150 ($91,880–$309,500) n=930 |
| Median gross rent | $959 | $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 | 74.7 yr ± 0.95 | 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 0.95 years of 74.7, 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