ZIP code
66542
in Tecumseh, KansasPopulation 3,019
60.27/ 100
Ranked #4,660 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 14.6%)
Ranked #41 of 682 Kansas ZIPs (top 6.1%)
Ranked #4 of 57 Topeka, KS ZIPs (top 7.1%)
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
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFAS — man-made “forever chemicals” that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down — were detected in EPA testing.
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 ›Lack of transportation
4.7%
in the bottom 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
74.8%
in the top 3.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Food insecurity
8.1%
in the bottom 7.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced food insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
7.2%
in the bottom 8.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
28.3%
in the bottom 9.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST18thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Mammography
80.5%
in the top 8.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
43.5%
in the top 8.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
6.3%
in the bottom 12.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS12thDefinition & 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 ›Vision disability
3.6%
in the bottom 11.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS12thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›The read
Tecumseh, Kansas (ZIP 66542) ranks in the top 14.6% healthiest ZIPs nationally (4,660th) and the top 6.1% of Kansas (41st).
The strongest marks in the data are worth naming first: modeled transportation registers in the bottom 5.1% nationally, and colon screening lies in the top 3.4% nationally. Modeled food insecurity is in the bottom 7.8% nationally, and housing insecurity registers in the bottom 8.8% nationally. Modeled loneliness lies in the bottom 9.0% nationally, modeled mammography is in the top 8.7% nationally, and housing-cost burden registers in the bottom 12.0% nationally. On the other side, PFAS in drinking water lies at the national maximum, modeled high cholesterol is in the top 8.6% nationally, and fatal road crashes registers in the top 13.5% nationally.
Against its neighbors, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, PFAS in drinking water is the family of man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 66409, 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 Topeka, KS metro area.
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 88%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 95%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 84%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 84%
8%
Disability
healthier than 79%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 62%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 54%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 46%
14%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 27%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 62%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 93%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 99%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 93%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 87%
8%
Disability
healthier than 85%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 75%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 59%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 50%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 96%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 95%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 91%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 92%
8%
Disability
healthier than 86%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 73%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 52%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 46%
14%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 34%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
66050
Kansasshares a border
Score 58.20
Closest healthier
66409
Kansasshares a border
Score 60.80
Similar health profile
06475
Connecticut99% similar profile
Score 66.60
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 | 29.3% | 26.8–31.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 39.3% | 36.5–42.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.7% | 9.8–11.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.0% | 9.0–11.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.0% | 6.2–7.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.4% | 5.5–7.4 |
| Depression among adults | 21.6% | 19.2–24.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.4% | 10.0–12.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 43.5% | 40.5–46.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 34.8% | 31.2–38.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 2.9–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.0% | 8.3–11.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.3% | 5.1–7.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 81.1% | 78.7–83.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 81.4% | 79.1–83.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.6% | 88.2–91.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 74.8% | 71.6–77.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 73.1% | 70.7–75.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.5% | 76.0–84.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.8% | 12.9–16.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.2% | 10.1–14.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.1% | 18.2–24.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.0% | 29.8–36.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.8% | 13.8–18.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.4% | 11.9–15.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.7% | 10.2–13.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.9% | 10.4–13.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 29.1% | 26.0–32.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.9% | 7.0–8.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.5–7.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.2% | 11.4–15.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.9% | 2.6–3.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.6% | 3.2–4.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 18.3% | 16.0–21.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.1% | 6.7–9.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 4.0% | 3.2–5.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.2% | 6.0–8.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 4.7% | 4.0–5.5 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.3% | 25.4–31.6 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.4% | 4.6–6.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | KS median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 4.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.8% (2.7–20.7%) n=688 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 10.6% (2.3–24.2%) n=686 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.7% (1.1–14.8%) n=689 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 45.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 24.0% (11.3–43.6%) n=689 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 2.2% (0.0–7.1%) n=689 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.8% (0.0–8.3%) n=688 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 88.4% (75.3–96.9%) n=688 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 11.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 19.5% (7.8–31.9%) n=688 |
| Homeownership rate | 85.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 79.7% (59.7–94.6%) n=688 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.7% (0.0–4.6%) n=688 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.1% (0.0–9.9%) n=692 |
| Single-parent households | 78.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 55.7% (41.7–78.0%) n=684 |
| Population 65+ | 19.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 20.6% (11.9–35.1%) n=692 |
| Median age | 43.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 41.9 yr (32.2–56.9) n=689 |
| Median household income | $108,218 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $67,738 ($49,860–$97,877) n=659 |
| Median home value | $234,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $135,800 ($68,740–$290,700) n=627 |
| Median gross rent | $1,118 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $820 ($592–$1,257) n=519 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | KS median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 80.8 yr ± 1.96 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 78.9 yr (76.2–81.8) n=687 |
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 1.96 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