ZIP code
73116
in Oklahoma City, OklahomaPopulation 10,211
60.51/ 100
Ranked #4,470 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 14.0%)
Ranked #5 of 634 Oklahoma ZIPs (top 0.8%)
Ranked #5 of 105 Oklahoma City, OK ZIPs (top 4.8%)
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.
Outpatient-care access
2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics 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 ›Dental provider access
2.9 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental 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 ›Physician access
5.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.42 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics 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 ›Civic-institution access
1.5 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations 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 ›Recreation access
1.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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 ›Park land
39.1%
in the top 3.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.31 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities 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 ›Lead in tap water
0 ppb
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
US1stDefinition & 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 ›Grocery access
0.21 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets 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. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite measure, ZIP 73116, one of several in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma sits in the top 14.0% healthiest ZIPs nationally (4,470th) and the top 0.8% of Oklahoma (5th).
The profile cuts both ways, and the readings bear that out: outpatient lies in the top 0.4% nationally, dental providers settles in the top 0.4% nationally, and physicians stands in the top 0.9% nationally. Mental-health providers is in the top 1.2% nationally, civic rests in the top 2.0% nationally, and recreation sits in the top 2.2% nationally. Park land registers in the top 3.4% nationally, and elder services lands in the top 4.3% nationally. Lead in tap water resides at the national minimum, and grocery lies in the top 6.7% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs that surround it, outpatient runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain language, lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. ZIP 73013, about 3.4 miles away, 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 Oklahoma City, OK metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 70%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 89%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 92%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 69%
8%
Disability
healthier than 78%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 92%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 27%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 11%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 90%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.00%
16%
Preventive Care
in the top 0.5%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.3%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 97%
8%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 92%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 24%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 18%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 76%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.00%
16%
Preventive Care
in the top 1.0%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.00%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 97%
8%
Disability
healthier than 88%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 90%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 31%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 11%
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.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 78.5 ± 1.5 years. The 47 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 76.0 years — 2.4 years above them.
Ranked #1,192 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
73105
Oklahomashares a border
Score 43.83
Closest healthier
73013
Oklahomaabout 3.4 mi away
Score 60.91
Similar health profile
38120
Tennessee98% similar profile
Score 63.79
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% | 26.2–30.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.2% | 33.5–39.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.6% | 8.7–10.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.7% | 9.5–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.6% | 5.9–7.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.6% | 4.9–6.3 |
| Depression among adults | 23.8% | 21.2–26.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.5% | 35.6–41.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 32.2% | 28.6–35.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.0% | 2.7–3.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.1% | 5.5–9.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.9% | 5.8–7.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.2% | 76.7–81.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.6% | 78.1–82.8 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.0% | 87.6–90.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.7% | 66.0–74.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 72.1% | 69.1–75.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 78.9% | 72.2–84.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.8% | 12.8–16.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.5% | 8.1–10.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.3% | 18.8–23.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.5% | 26.3–34.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 13.8% | 12.3–15.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.1% | 12.6–15.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.8% | 9.7–12.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.2% | 10.9–13.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.5% | 28.7–34.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.8% | 7.0–8.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.4% | 5.7–7.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.3% | 11.8–14.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.7% | 2.5–3.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.8% | 3.4–4.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 20.6% | 17.8–23.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.3% | 7.8–10.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 6.8% | 5.6–8.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.4% | 7.2–9.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.6% | 4.9–6.4 |
| Loneliness among adults | 28.0% | 24.4–31.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.0% | 5.2–6.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OK median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 16.3% (6.5–26.1%) n=643 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 19.4% (9.5–30.7%) n=643 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.9% (4.8–18.9%) n=644 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 53.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.4% (9.0–38.4%) n=644 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 1.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.3% (0.4–8.8%) n=643 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.0–9.0%) n=643 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 85.4% (70.2–95.0%) n=643 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 30.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.0% (9.5–31.0%) n=643 |
| Homeownership rate | 68.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.2% (56.5–91.0%) n=643 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.3% (0.0–6.1%) n=643 |
| Foreign-born population | 8.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.0–9.3%) n=645 |
| Single-parent households | 55.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.7% (39.5–66.1%) n=640 |
| Population 65+ | 20.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.4% (11.9–29.5%) n=645 |
| Median age | 40.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.3 yr (33.1–52.0) n=642 |
| Median household income | $81,226 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,728 ($43,042–$88,542) n=616 |
| Median home value | $321,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $142,200 ($83,960–$248,900) n=615 |
| Median gross rent | $1,186 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $839 ($628–$1,136) n=546 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OK median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 78.5 yr ± 0.74 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 77.2 yr (73.6–81.3) n=638 |
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 0.74 years of 78.5, 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