ZIP code
68152
in Omaha, NebraskaPopulation 6,791
59.55/ 100
Ranked #5,186 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 16%)
Ranked #70 of 566 Nebraska ZIPs (top 12.4%)
Ranked #37 of 113 Omaha, NE-IA ZIPs (top 33%)
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.
Lead in tap water
11 ppb
in the top 1.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
US98thDefinition & 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 ›Radon
3.2 pCi/L
in the top 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST39thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The modeled typical indoor radon level for this area, in picocuries per liter — the EPA recommends fixing a home at 4 pCi/L or above.
Modeled from indoor-radon measurements. In Alaska and Hawaii, where those measurements are not published, a US Geological Survey geologic radon-potential category stands in — a coarser input, disclosed rather than hidden.
Full methodology ›Physician access
2.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Loneliness
27.9%
in the bottom 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST40thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
0.28%
in the bottom 8.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS9thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Households without a vehicle
13.6%
in the top 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
29.8%
in the bottom 8.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST46thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
54.2%
in the top 10.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS89thDefinition & 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 ›Lithium in drinking water
56 µg/L
in the top 11.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS88thDefinition & 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 ›Transit access
1.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 16% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS84thDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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
Overall, ZIP 68152, one of several in Omaha, Nebraska places in the top 16% healthiest ZIPs nationally (5,186th) and the top 12.4% of Nebraska (70th).
The measures fall on both sides for this area, fairly evenly: physicians lands in the top 5.8% nationally, and modeled loneliness stands in the bottom 6.8% nationally. Floodplain exposure registers in the bottom 8.6% nationally, and modeled short sleep settles in the bottom 8.8% nationally. Childcare sits in the top 12.9% nationally. Pulling the other way, lead in tap water lies in the top 1.8% nationally, modeled radon rests in the top 7.6% nationally, and households without a vehicle resides in the top 8.7% nationally. Modeled pfas is in the top 10.9% nationally, and lithium in drinking water lands in the top 11.7% nationally.
Beside the areas that surround it, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For readers new to these terms, lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. Radon is a radioactive soil gas the EPA identifies as the top cause of lung cancer in nonsmokers. 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. Among nearby ZIPs, the nearest healthier one overall is ZIP 68122, 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 Omaha, NE-IA 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 74%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 84%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 80%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 96%
8%
Disability
healthier than 67%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 61%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 79%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 60%
21%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 15%
14%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 73%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 96%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 93%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 76%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 98%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 93%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 47%
21%
Disability
healthier than 50%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 88%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 90%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 87%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
in the top 0.9%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 80%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 45%
16%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 21%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 30%
14%
Disability
healthier than 26%
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 ›
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 76.5 ± 1.5 years. A median household income of $84,958 predicts 79.4 years — 2.9 years below.
Ranked #4,000 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
68023
Nebraskashares a border
Score 59.21
Closest healthier
68122
Nebraskashares a border
Score 63.02
Similar health profile
57034
South Dakota99% similar profile
Score 55.74
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 | 28.5% | 26.6–30.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 38.4% | 36.1–40.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.5% | 9.7–11.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.9% | 8.0–9.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.4% | 6.7–8.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.9% | 6.1–7.8 |
| Depression among adults | 17.0% | 15.3–18.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.5% | 11.3–13.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.3% | 35.1–39.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.9% | 34.0–40.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.5% | 7.1–10.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.8% | 7.7–10.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 82.0% | 80.1–83.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.4% | 78.5–82.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.2% | 87.0–89.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 69.1% | 65.8–72.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.3% | 65.9–70.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.0% | 74.4–83.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.3% | 14.7–17.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.9% | 11.4–14.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.2% | 21.7–26.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 29.8% | 27.0–32.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.1% | 15.4–19.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 12.9% | 11.7–14.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.2% | 11.0–13.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.3% | 10.1–12.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 29.3% | 26.9–31.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.0% | 7.2–8.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.1% | 6.4–8.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.5% | 12.9–16.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.4–4.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.5–5.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.3% | 18.9–23.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.8% | 11.1–14.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.4% | 8.1–10.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.7% | 8.5–11.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.7% | 5.9–7.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 27.9% | 25.0–30.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.8% | 5.9–7.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NE median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 8.0% (2.6–16.7%) n=578 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 8.4% (1.6–20.4%) n=579 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 5.2% (1.5–11.9%) n=578 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 41.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 24.4% (12.1–39.7%) n=578 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 1.4% (0.0–5.8%) n=579 |
| Households without a vehicle | 13.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.1% (0.0–7.6%) n=578 |
| Broadband subscription | 86.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 87.6% (75.9–96.3%) n=578 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 30.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 18.5% (7.6–30.4%) n=578 |
| Homeownership rate | 77.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 80.5% (61.0–93.2%) n=578 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.7% (0.0–4.6%) n=578 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.1% (0.0–8.3%) n=579 |
| Single-parent households | 56.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 57.2% (42.6–77.1%) n=577 |
| Population 65+ | 27.1% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 21.2% (11.4–34.7%) n=579 |
| Median age | 47.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 42.3 yr (33.0–56.3) n=577 |
| Median household income | $84,958 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $73,386 ($53,469–$103,625) n=556 |
| Median home value | $316,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $168,400 ($90,000–$306,740) n=533 |
| Median gross rent | $1,104 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $850 ($610–$1,250) n=442 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NE median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 76.5 yr ± 0.79 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.1 yr (77.4–83.0) n=553 |
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 0.79 years of 76.5, 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