ZIP code
65101
in Jefferson City, MissouriPopulation 28,793
50.89/ 100
Ranked #15,007 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 47%)
Ranked #161 of 993 Missouri ZIPs (top 16%)
Ranked #11 of 31 Jefferson City, MO ZIPs (top 35%)
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.
Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to an emergency room
21 mi
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS95thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare-certified hospital with an emergency room.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 7.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Civic-institution access
0.73 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations 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 ›Child-care access
0.57 per 1,000 residents
in the top 8.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST89thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›Lead in tap water
5.6 ppb
in the top 8.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
US92ndDefinition & source ›
The lead level at the 90th percentile of tap-water samples reported by the public water systems serving this ZIP, in parts per billion — the EPA requires action above 15 ppb.
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 ›Lithium in drinking water
60 µg/L
in the top 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Loud transportation noise
1.4%
in the top 13.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS87thDefinition & 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 ›Physician access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 13.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS86thDefinition & 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 ›The read
ZIP 65101, one of several in Jefferson City, Missouri, on the composite measure, lands in the top 47% healthiest ZIPs nationally (15,007th) and the top 16% of Missouri (161st).
Where this area does well, the measures make it plain: civic lies in the top 7.1% nationally, and childcare settles in the top 8.2% nationally. Distance to a community health center stands at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Elder services is in the top 11.4% nationally. Against that, modeled industrial-pollution burden rests in the top 4.2% nationally, and distance to an emergency room sits in the top 4.8% nationally. Modeled expected annual loss registers in the top 5.5% nationally, and disaster risk lands in the top 7.1% nationally. Lead in tap water resides in the top 8.5% nationally, and lithium in drinking water lies in the top 8.7% nationally.
Set against the neighboring ZIPs, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In everyday language, 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. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 65016, 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 Jefferson City, MO 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 72%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 65%
16%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 61%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 56%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 27%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 40%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 23%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 40%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 21%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 89%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 72%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 72%
8%
Disability
healthier than 85%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 67%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 55%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 53%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 20%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 14%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 93%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 60%
8%
Disability
healthier than 73%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 87%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 53%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 40%
13%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 3%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 33%
11%
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 77.5 ± 1.1 years. A median household income of $74,807 predicts 78.9 years — 1.5 years below.
Ranked #1,807 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
65016
Missourishares a border
Score 53.29
Closest healthier
65039
Missourishares a border
Score 60.94
Similar health profile
08063
New Jersey94% similar profile
Score 50.44
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 | 26.1% | 23.2–29.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 35.6% | 31.7–39.5 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.7% | 6.9–8.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.8% | 5.2–6.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.9% | 6.2–7.7 |
| Depression among adults | 23.6% | 20.2–27.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.6% | 9.2–12.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.3% | 31.3–39.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 37.6% | 30.7–44.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.1% | 2.9–3.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.7% | 9.5–14.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.5% | 7.1–9.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.6% | 70.4–76.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.5% | 73.8–80.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.4% | 81.3–85.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.4% | 60.4–70.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 61.7% | 58.1–65.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.1% | 71.0–84.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.7% | 15.4–22.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.4% | 13.3–17.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 27.6% | 23.6–31.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 37.7% | 31.6–44.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.1% | 16.9–21.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.6% | 15.7–19.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.2% | 11.8–14.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.3% | 15.5–19.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 35.1% | 31.0–39.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.2% | 6.4–8.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.4% | 7.5–9.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.5% | 11.9–15.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.5% | 3.2–3.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.2–4.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.8% | 17.8–24.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.1% | 11.2–15.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.1% | 8.7–11.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.0% | 10.4–13.7 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 8.3% | 7.4–9.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.2% | 28.4–38.2 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.8% | 7.7–10.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MO median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.3% (3.2–26.0%) n=1,009 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 12.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.2% (3.5–28.4%) n=1,006 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.5% (2.5–20.5%) n=1,009 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 33.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.1% (7.2–40.2%) n=1,009 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.5%) n=1,003 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.1% (0.0–11.9%) n=1,009 |
| Broadband subscription | 89.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.3% (72.7–95.2%) n=1,009 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 19.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.7% (8.4–33.9%) n=1,009 |
| Homeownership rate | 64.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 79.4% (56.0–94.3%) n=1,009 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–5.1%) n=1,009 |
| Foreign-born population | 2.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.8% (0.0–6.4%) n=1,010 |
| Single-parent households | 52.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 55.0% (39.5–75.6%) n=1,005 |
| Population 65+ | 14.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.2% (11.7–31.1%) n=1,010 |
| Median age | 38.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.5 yr (33.3–55.9) n=1,005 |
| Median household income | $74,807 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,740 ($42,457–$95,231) n=948 |
| Median home value | $243,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $174,150 ($91,880–$309,500) n=930 |
| Median gross rent | $791 | $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 | 77.5 yr ± 0.56 | 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 0.56 years of 77.5, 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