ZIP code
65444
in Bucyrus, MissouriPopulation 824
34.96/ 100
Ranked #29,409 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 8.3%)
Ranked #864 of 993 Missouri ZIPs (bottom 13.0%)
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.
Arsenic in groundwater
1.1%
in the bottom 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
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
11.9%
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
21%
in the top 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
25.4%
in the top 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS6thDefinition & 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 ›Independent-living disability
12.6%
in the top 8.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Energy-cost burden
5.2%
in the top 7.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Coronary heart disease
10.2%
in the top 8.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility
12.8 mi
in the top 10.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest facility that handles enough hazardous chemicals to require an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases.
Full methodology ›The read
Bucyrus, Missouri (ZIP 65444), by its composite score, sits in the bottom 8.3% nationally (29,409th) and the bottom 13.0% of Missouri (864th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
The measures fall on both sides for this area, fairly evenly: modeled arsenic lies in the bottom 4.2% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden rests in the bottom 6.0% nationally. Pulling the other way, modeled hearing disability resides in the top 4.8% nationally, and cognitive disability is in the top 6.0% nationally. Modeled tooth loss lands in the top 6.8% nationally, mobility disability stands in the top 6.4% nationally, and independent living disability registers in the top 8.4% nationally. Modeled energy burden settles in the top 7.1% nationally, and coronary heart disease sits in the top 8.3% nationally. Fiber broadband lies at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs.
Next to the surrounding area, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 65483, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 80%
14%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 57%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 7%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 12%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 25%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 6%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 15%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 37%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 82%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 63%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 51%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 8%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 10%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 26%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 10%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 16%
8%
Disability
healthier than 9%
7%
“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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
65483
Missourishares a border
Score 37.50
Closest healthier
65484
Missourishares a border
Score 44.12
Similar health profile
65646
Missouri100% similar profile
Score 40.19
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 | 36.5% | 32.7–40.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 45.2% | 40.7–49.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.2% | 9.2–11.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.3% | 9.9–12.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.2% | 9.0–11.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 13.3% | 11.4–15.3 |
| Depression among adults | 26.4% | 22.7–30.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 16.7% | 14.5–19.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 42.3% | 37.8–46.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 42.7% | 34.9–50.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.2% | 4.6–5.8 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 25.4% | 21.4–29.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.5% | 8.4–13.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.5% | 77.8–83.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.8% | 76.4–83.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.0% | 81.9–86.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 60.5% | 54.8–65.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 53.6% | 49.6–57.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.3% | 61.4–77.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.9% | 11.3–16.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 23.1% | 19.6–26.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 37.4% | 32.0–42.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 40.3% | 33.3–47.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 28.7% | 24.9–32.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.3% | 17.0–21.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 19.1% | 16.7–21.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 21.0% | 18.4–23.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 45.4% | 40.4–50.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.9% | 10.5–13.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.6% | 11.0–14.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 23.2% | 20.1–26.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.3–7.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.4% | 6.5–8.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 19.8% | 16.6–23.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.3% | 15.0–21.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 17.2% | 14.3–20.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.7% | 11.5–16.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.4% | 8.9–11.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 29.9% | 25.2–34.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 11.0% | 9.4–12.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MO median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.3% (3.2–26.0%) n=1,009 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.2% (3.5–28.4%) n=1,006 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.5% (2.5–20.5%) n=1,009 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 27.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.1% (7.2–40.2%) n=1,009 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.5%) n=1,003 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.1% (0.0–11.9%) n=1,009 |
| Broadband subscription | 84.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.3% (72.7–95.2%) n=1,009 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 16.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.7% (8.4–33.9%) n=1,009 |
| Homeownership rate | 79.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 79.4% (56.0–94.3%) n=1,009 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–5.1%) n=1,009 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.8% (0.0–6.4%) n=1,010 |
| Single-parent households | 66.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 55.0% (39.5–75.6%) n=1,005 |
| Population 65+ | 32.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.2% (11.7–31.1%) n=1,010 |
| Median age | 56.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.5 yr (33.3–55.9) n=1,005 |
| Median household income | $56,875 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,740 ($42,457–$95,231) n=948 |
| Median home value | $130,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $174,150 ($91,880–$309,500) n=930 |
| Median gross rent | $630 | $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 | 76.6 yr ± 0.76 | 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 0.76 years of 76.6, 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