ZIP code
71046
in Keachi, LouisianaPopulation 1,033
37.23/ 100
Ranked #28,421 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 11.4%)
Ranked #306 of 508 Louisiana ZIPs (bottom 40%)
Ranked #24 of 39 Shreveport-Bossier City, LA ZIPs (bottom 38%)
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.
Air-toxics cancer risk
40.3 per million
in the top 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS98thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Unemployment rate
16.4%
in the top 3.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
48.1%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST74thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Mobility disability
22.9%
in the top 7.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST76thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
18.2%
in the top 7.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST72ndUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Fatal road crashes
38.7 per 100,000 residents per year
in the top 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›Self-care disability
6.5%
in the top 8.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST70thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Stroke
5.5%
in the top 7.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST74thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
20.2%
in the top 8.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST59thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
12.5%
in the top 8.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST69thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›The read
By the composite measure, Keachi, Louisiana (ZIP 71046) sits in the bottom 11.4% nationally (28,421st) and the bottom 40% of Louisiana (306th).
What the numbers press hardest on defines much of the story here: modeled air-toxics cancer risk stands in the top 2.2% nationally, unemployment is in the top 3.1% nationally, and modeled high blood pressure rests in the top 5.9% nationally. Modeled mobility disability sits in the top 7.1% nationally, modeled diabetes registers in the top 7.5% nationally, and fatal road crashes lands in the top 7.4% nationally. Modeled self-care disability resides in the top 8.5% nationally, and stroke lies in the top 7.8% nationally. Modeled cognitive disability settles in the top 8.5% nationally, and independent living disability stands in the top 8.8% nationally.
In plain language, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. ZIP 71030, just across the boundary, ranks healthier overall.
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 Shreveport-Bossier City, LA metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 81%
13%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 51%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 11%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 13%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 10%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 9%
8%
Disability
healthier than 8%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 16%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 31%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 42%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 54%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 47%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 24%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 32%
14%
Disability
healthier than 26%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 20%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 76%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 84%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 46%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 54%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 41%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 24%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 35%
8%
Disability
healthier than 27%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 14%
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
71030
Louisianashares a border
Score 42.87
Closest healthier
71047
Louisianashares a border
Score 42.16
Similar health profile
71473
Louisiana98% similar profile
Score 35.88
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 | 35.8% | 32.7–38.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 48.1% | 44.4–51.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.9% | 8.2–9.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.0% | 9.9–12.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.6% | 8.7–10.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.5% | 10.2–12.9 |
| Depression among adults | 27.6% | 24.4–31.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 18.2% | 16.2–20.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.9% | 38.1–45.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 43.2% | 36.4–50.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.5% | 5.1–6.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 16.0% | 13.3–18.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.1% | 7.7–10.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 81.9% | 79.9–83.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 83.4% | 80.9–85.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.0% | 85.4–88.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.9% | 64.4–72.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 57.6% | 54.1–61.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.7% | 74.8–85.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.7% | 12.5–17.0 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 20.3% | 17.8–23.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 34.6% | 30.2–39.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 40.1% | 34.2–46.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 28.9% | 25.8–32.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.0% | 18.1–22.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 18.3% | 16.4–20.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 20.2% | 18.1–22.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 44.0% | 39.8–48.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.1% | 9.1–11.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.5% | 11.1–13.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 22.9% | 20.4–25.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.9–7.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.2% | 7.4–9.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 29.0% | 25.6–33.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 25.2% | 22.1–28.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 21.7% | 18.9–24.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.3% | 15.1–19.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 12.2% | 10.8–13.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.8% | 32.2–41.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 12.9% | 11.4–14.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | LA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 11.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 17.8% (6.0–36.8%) n=504 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 10.4% (2.9–20.5%) n=505 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 29.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 14.0% (4.3–26.4%) n=508 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 10.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 16.6% (5.9–37.1%) n=508 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 16.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 5.5% (0.0–13.6%) n=501 |
| Households without a vehicle | 6.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 6.0% (0.0–15.0%) n=504 |
| Broadband subscription | 90.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 84.4% (64.1–94.5%) n=504 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 18.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 23.1% (9.3–41.8%) n=504 |
| Homeownership rate | 89.3% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 77.4% (50.9–92.7%) n=504 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 1.5% (0.0–4.8%) n=504 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.2% (0.0–7.6%) n=508 |
| Single-parent households | 45.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.0% (29.6–65.8%) n=495 |
| Population 65+ | 23.1% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.3% (10.2–29.0%) n=508 |
| Median age | 40.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 39.6 yr (33.0–52.4) n=500 |
| Median household income | $52,679 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $56,458 ($34,647–$88,928) n=457 |
| Median home value | $84,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $163,450 ($86,100–$284,620) n=452 |
| Median gross rent | $774 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $915 ($606–$1,325) n=389 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | LA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 75.9 yr ± 1.02 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 75.9 yr (73.2–79.0) n=494 |
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 1.02 years of 75.9, 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