ZIP code
74019
in Claremore, OklahomaPopulation 21,023
48.41/ 100
Ranked #18,407 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 43%)
Ranked #88 of 634 Oklahoma ZIPs (top 13.9%)
Ranked #15 of 88 Tulsa, OK ZIPs (top 17%)
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.
Natural-disaster risk
in the top 4.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
10 µg/L
in the bottom 9.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS9thDefinition & 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 ›Dry extreme heat
49.2 days/year
in the top 9.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST24thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
29.8%
in the top 10.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 11.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS89thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 11.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS88thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Subsidized affordable housing
184 units
in the top 12.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS87thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
1.3%
in the top 13.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS86thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
2.5%
in the bottom 25% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS25thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 74019, one of several in Claremore, Oklahoma, in overall standing, comes out in the bottom 43% nationally (18,407th) and the top 13.9% of Oklahoma (88th).
A balanced showing across the data, with a few readings each side: lithium in drinking water resides in the bottom 9.5% nationally, and subsidized affordable housing sits in the top 12.7% nationally. On the other hand, modeled disaster risk stands in the top 4.1% nationally, modeled extreme heat resides in the top 9.6% nationally, and floodplain exposure sits in the top 10.2% nationally. Modeled expected annual loss stands in the top 11.5% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden resides in the top 11.6% nationally. Modeled fine-particle sits in the top 12.9% nationally, and loud transportation noise stands in the top 13.7% nationally. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility resides at the national minimum, shared with about 31% of ZIPs.
Defined simply, for reference, disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 74021, 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 Tulsa, OK 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 70%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 63%
11%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 51%
21%
Disability
healthier than 47%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 44%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 13%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 37%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 39%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 9%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 81%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 92%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 81%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 89%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 79%
8%
Disability
healthier than 85%
7%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 9%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 14%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 70%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 89%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 83%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 93%
8%
Disability
healthier than 80%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 26%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 9%
5%
Healthcare Access
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 ›
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 78.4 ± 1.3 years. The 49 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 75.8 years — 2.5 years above them.
Ranked #1,122 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
74015
Oklahomashares a border
Score 42.89
Closest healthier
74021
Oklahomashares a border
Score 49.79
Similar health profile
95626
California97% similar profile
Score 46.92
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 | 27.4% | 24.5–30.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.3% | 33.6–41.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.7% | 7.9–9.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.5% | 10.2–12.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.0% | 6.4–7.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.4% | 6.6–8.1 |
| Depression among adults | 24.7% | 21.4–28.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.1% | 10.5–13.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.0% | 34.2–41.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.6% | 33.7–45.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.5% | 3.2–3.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 12.7% | 10.3–15.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.4% | 7.2–9.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.2% | 73.3–78.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.1% | 74.8–81.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.2% | 84.5–87.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.5% | 60.6–70.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 62.3% | 58.8–65.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.3% | 62.1–77.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.5% | 12.0–17.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.2% | 13.3–17.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 27.4% | 23.7–31.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.3% | 28.8–40.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.9% | 15.8–20.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.9% | 15.1–18.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.6% | 12.1–15.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.9% | 14.3–17.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 36.4% | 32.6–40.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.0% | 8.1–10.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.5% | 7.6–9.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.4% | 13.6–17.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–3.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.5–5.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.9% | 20.5–27.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.8% | 11.9–16.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.7% | 9.1–12.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.1% | 9.6–12.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.9% | 6.9–8.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.8% | 27.2–36.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.0% | 6.9–9.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OK median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 16.3% (6.5–26.1%) n=643 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 14.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 19.4% (9.5–30.7%) n=643 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 5.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.9% (4.8–18.9%) n=644 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 28.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.4% (9.0–38.4%) n=644 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.3% (0.4–8.8%) n=643 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.0–9.0%) n=643 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 85.4% (70.2–95.0%) n=643 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 20.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.0% (9.5–31.0%) n=643 |
| Homeownership rate | 82.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.2% (56.5–91.0%) n=643 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.3% (0.0–6.1%) n=643 |
| Foreign-born population | 2.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.0–9.3%) n=645 |
| Single-parent households | 53.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.7% (39.5–66.1%) n=640 |
| Population 65+ | 17.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.4% (11.9–29.5%) n=645 |
| Median age | 38.8 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.3 yr (33.1–52.0) n=642 |
| Median household income | $84,342 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,728 ($43,042–$88,542) n=616 |
| Median home value | $242,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $142,200 ($83,960–$248,900) n=615 |
| Median gross rent | $997 | $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 | 78.4 yr ± 0.68 | 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 0.68 years of 78.4, 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