ZIP code
65787
in Roach, MissouriPopulation 1,305
49.53/ 100
Ranked #16,899 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 47%)
Ranked #209 of 993 Missouri ZIPs (top 21%)
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
1.2%
in the bottom 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST15thUS6thDefinition & 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 ›High cholesterol
44.7%
in the top 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
72%
in the top 8.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
11.1%
in the top 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST76thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
28.7%
in the bottom 11.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS12thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
70.6%
in the top 17% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS83rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
9.7%
in the bottom 23% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS23rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
35%
in the top 29% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS71stDefinition & 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, Roach, Missouri (ZIP 65787) lands in the bottom 47% nationally (16,899th) and the top 21% of Missouri (209th).
Taken together, the data gives a genuinely mixed reading: modeled arsenic settles in the bottom 5.7% nationally, tree cover is in the top 8.2% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden sits in the bottom 11.1% nationally. Modeled loneliness lands in the bottom 11.6% nationally, distance to a Superfund site lies in the top 12.8% nationally, and modeled transportation noise stands in the bottom 13.3% nationally. On the other side, modeled high cholesterol rests in the top 5.0% nationally, and hearing disability registers in the top 8.7% nationally. Fatal road crashes resides in the top 12.8% nationally, and home broadband subscription settles in the bottom 13.2% nationally.
Put simply, 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. Distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. On the overall standing, ZIP 65079, 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
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 65%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 75%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 63%
8%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 54%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 45%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 20%
21%
Disability
healthier than 27%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 30%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 72%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 74%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 95%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 88%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 94%
8%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 52%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 50%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 28%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 30%
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.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 75.1; chronic-disease standing 19.8 — 55 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #2,096 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
65020
Missourishares a border
Score 45.58
Closest healthier
65079
Missourishares a border
Score 51.07
Similar health profile
29355
South Carolina98% similar profile
Score 49.44
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 | 36.8% | 33.1–41.1 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 42.6% | 38.1–47.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 12.3% | 11.1–13.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.5% | 8.5–10.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.3% | 9.0–11.9 |
| Depression among adults | 22.9% | 19.6–26.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.7% | 12.7–17.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 44.7% | 40.1–49.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.3% | 27.9–43.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.6% | 4.2–5.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.7% | 7.8–11.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.2% | 6.6–10.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 82.6% | 79.8–85.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.9% | 78.7–84.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.1% | 86.4–89.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.6% | 65.7–75.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 64.5% | 61.0–68.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 76.3% | 69.0–82.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.5% | 11.0–16.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.3% | 13.9–19.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 31.5% | 26.7–36.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.4% | 28.2–41.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.0% | 19.1–25.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.5% | 13.7–17.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.2% | 14.3–18.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.9% | 14.0–18.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 38.7% | 34.1–43.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.9–12.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.3% | 8.2–10.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 19.5% | 17.0–22.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.4% | 3.8–5.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–6.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 18.8% | 15.7–22.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.9% | 9.0–13.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 8.3% | 6.7–10.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.0% | 7.5–10.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.7% | 5.8–7.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.7% | 23.8–33.6 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.6% | 5.6–7.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | MO median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.3% (3.2–26.0%) n=1,009 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 12.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 13.2% (3.5–28.4%) n=1,006 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.5% (2.5–20.5%) n=1,009 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 27.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.1% (7.2–40.2%) n=1,009 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.9% (0.0–8.5%) n=1,003 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.1% (0.0–11.9%) n=1,009 |
| Broadband subscription | 77.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 86.3% (72.7–95.2%) n=1,009 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 22.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.7% (8.4–33.9%) n=1,009 |
| Homeownership rate | 90.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 79.4% (56.0–94.3%) n=1,009 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.1% (0.0–5.1%) n=1,009 |
| Foreign-born population | 5.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 0.8% (0.0–6.4%) n=1,010 |
| Single-parent households | 76.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 55.0% (39.5–75.6%) n=1,005 |
| Population 65+ | 37.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 19.2% (11.7–31.1%) n=1,010 |
| Median age | 58.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.5 yr (33.3–55.9) n=1,005 |
| Median household income | $62,917 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $61,740 ($42,457–$95,231) n=948 |
| Median home value | $314,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $174,150 ($91,880–$309,500) n=930 |
| Median gross rent | $1,086 | $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 | 80.8 yr ± 2.04 | 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 2.04 years of 80.8, 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