ZIP code
64744
in El Dorado Springs, MissouriPopulation 8,242
33.85/ 100
Ranked #29,790 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 7.1%)
Ranked #889 of 993 Missouri ZIPs (bottom 10.5%)
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.
PFAS in drinking water
6.4%
in the bottom 2.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS3rdDefinition & 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 ›Hearing disability
12.2%
in the top 3.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
21.6%
in the top 4.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
83 µg/L
in the top 4.4% 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 ›Independent-living disability
13.2%
in the top 6.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
23.2%
in the top 6.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
5.4%
in the top 5.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 7.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS8thDefinition & 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 ›Coronary heart disease
10.3%
in the top 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Stroke
5.4%
in the top 8.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›The read
In its overall standing, El Dorado Springs, Missouri (ZIP 64744) lands in the bottom 7.1% nationally (29,790th) and the bottom 10.5% of Missouri (889th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
Reading the numbers as a whole, the picture lands somewhere in between: modeled pfas sits in the bottom 2.6% nationally. Distance to an emergency room lands at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Modeled industrial-pollution burden lies in the bottom 7.9% nationally. On the other side, modeled hearing disability stands in the top 3.8% nationally, and cognitive disability rests in the top 4.6% nationally. Lithium in drinking water registers in the top 4.4% nationally, and modeled independent living disability resides in the top 6.1% nationally. Modeled mobility disability settles in the top 6.4% nationally, and energy burden is in the top 5.8% nationally. Modeled coronary heart disease sits in the top 7.7% nationally.
Put simply, 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. 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. On the overall standing, ZIP 64767, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 49%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 9%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 10%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 19%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 9%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 13%
8%
Disability
healthier than 5%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 22%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 10%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 7%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 37%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 15%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 17%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 13%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 15%
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
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 73.7 ± 1.9 years. A median household income of $47,685 predicts 77.2 years — 3.5 years below.
Ranked #4,668 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 73.7 ± 1.9 years. The 50 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 77.9 years — 4.3 years below them.
Ranked #3,128 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
64750
Missourishares a border
Score 25.93
Closest healthier
64767
Missourishares a border
Score 35.49
Similar health profile
74401
Oklahoma100% similar profile
Score 28.18
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 | 35.8% | 32.7–39.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 43.1% | 39.4–46.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.3% | 9.4–11.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.5% | 10.3–12.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.3% | 9.4–11.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 13.3% | 11.8–14.7 |
| Depression among adults | 26.6% | 23.3–30.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 16.1% | 14.4–18.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.7% | 37.8–45.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 40.8% | 33.5–48.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–5.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 20.1% | 17.3–23.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.9% | 9.3–12.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.2% | 77.9–82.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.9% | 75.7–82.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 82.6% | 80.7–84.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 60.4% | 55.6–65.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 51.2% | 47.9–54.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.0% | 62.5–76.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.9% | 11.7–16.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 22.4% | 19.9–25.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 37.3% | 32.8–42.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.8% | 32.7–45.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 28.6% | 25.7–31.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.6% | 17.7–21.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 19.1% | 17.2–21.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 21.6% | 19.5–23.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 45.3% | 41.1–49.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 12.2% | 11.1–13.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 13.2% | 11.9–14.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 23.2% | 20.8–25.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.5–6.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.7% | 7.0–8.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.0% | 17.1–22.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.8% | 16.2–21.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 17.5% | 15.2–20.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.1% | 12.2–15.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.8% | 9.6–12.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.1% | 27.5–36.5 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 11.3% | 9.9–12.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MO median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 23.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.3% (3.2–26.0%) n=1,009 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 20.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.2% (3.5–28.4%) n=1,006 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 12.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.5% (2.5–20.5%) n=1,009 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 15.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.1% (7.2–40.2%) n=1,009 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.5%) n=1,003 |
| Households without a vehicle | 9.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.1% (0.0–11.9%) n=1,009 |
| Broadband subscription | 82.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.3% (72.7–95.2%) n=1,009 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 26.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.7% (8.4–33.9%) n=1,009 |
| Homeownership rate | 68.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 79.4% (56.0–94.3%) n=1,009 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–5.1%) n=1,009 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.8% (0.0–6.4%) n=1,010 |
| Single-parent households | 51.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 55.0% (39.5–75.6%) n=1,005 |
| Population 65+ | 20.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.2% (11.7–31.1%) n=1,010 |
| Median age | 43.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.5 yr (33.3–55.9) n=1,005 |
| Median household income | $47,685 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,740 ($42,457–$95,231) n=948 |
| Median home value | $167,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $174,150 ($91,880–$309,500) n=930 |
| Median gross rent | $827 | $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 | 73.7 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 73.7, 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