ZIP code
74050
in Oakhurst, OklahomaPopulation 475
26.85/ 100
Ranked #31,267 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 2.5%)
Ranked #618 of 634 Oklahoma ZIPs (bottom 2.6%)
Ranked #84 of 88 Tulsa, OK ZIPs (bottom 4.6%)
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.
Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Mammography
63.9%
in the bottom 2.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST9thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
23.3%
in the top 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
28.3%
in the top 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Slow internet speeds
4.5%
in the top 2.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes whose fastest available download speed is under 10 Mbps.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
54.2%
in the bottom 4.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST5thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
13.6%
in the top 5.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Crowded housing
11.9%
in the top 3.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Walkability
160 intersections/sq mi
in the top 4.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
15.4%
in the top 6.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›The read
Oakhurst, Oklahoma (ZIP 74050), overall, ranks in the bottom 2.5% nationally (31,267th) and the bottom 2.6% of Oklahoma (618th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
Several serious readings shape the profile and deserve first mention: modeled industrial-pollution burden settles in the top 0.9% nationally, mammography is in the bottom 2.1% nationally, and cognitive disability sits in the top 2.1% nationally. Modeled tooth loss lands in the top 4.2% nationally, slow internet speeds lies in the top 2.7% nationally, and modeled colon screening stands in the bottom 4.3% nationally. Modeled independent living disability rests in the top 5.0% nationally, and crowded housing registers in the top 3.5% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff resides in the top 6.5% nationally. On the better side, walkability settles in the top 4.5% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. ZIP 74107, just across the boundary, comes out 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 Tulsa, OK metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 47%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 16%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 9%
16%
Environmental HazardPartial
in the bottom 0.6%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 5%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 3%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 5%
8%
Disability
healthier than 5%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 25%
5%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 84%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 40%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 53%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 11%
16%
Environmental HazardPartial
in the bottom 0.2%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 5%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 3%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 2%
8%
Disability
healthier than 12%
7%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 42%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 31%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 15%
16%
Environmental HazardPartial
healthier than 1%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 6%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 3%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 5%
8%
Disability
healthier than 9%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
74107
Oklahomashares a border
Score 33.17
Closest healthier
74131
Oklahomashares a border
Score 40.66
Similar health profile
64053
Missouri99% similar profile
Score 25.80
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 | 29.8% | 26.9–32.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 39.6% | 36.0–43.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.1% | 6.5–7.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.9% | 11.6–14.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.4% | 7.6–9.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.3% | 10.0–12.9 |
| Depression among adults | 28.3% | 25.0–31.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.7% | 13.0–16.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.2% | 35.7–42.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 43.3% | 37.3–49.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.6% | 4.2–5.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 28.3% | 24.7–32.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 15.2% | 12.7–17.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.0% | 71.3–76.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 76.2% | 72.8–79.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 80.2% | 77.8–82.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 54.2% | 50.0–58.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 47.5% | 44.1–50.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 63.9% | 56.0–71.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.5% | 11.4–15.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 25.2% | 21.9–28.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 38.4% | 33.7–43.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 42.2% | 37.0–47.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 28.7% | 25.4–32.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 21.8% | 19.6–24.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 18.3% | 16.3–20.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 23.3% | 20.8–25.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 47.0% | 42.7–51.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.7–11.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 13.6% | 12.1–15.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 21.2% | 18.9–23.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.3% | 5.6–7.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.8% | 7.9–9.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 27.7% | 23.8–31.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 28.3% | 24.5–32.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 26.7% | 22.8–30.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 19.9% | 17.2–22.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 14.1% | 12.4–15.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 35.1% | 30.4–39.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 15.4% | 13.4–17.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OK median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 27.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 16.3% (6.5–26.1%) n=643 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 20.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 19.4% (9.5–30.7%) n=643 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.9% (4.8–18.9%) n=644 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 13.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.4% (9.0–38.4%) n=644 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.3% (0.4–8.8%) n=643 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.0–9.0%) n=643 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 85.4% (70.2–95.0%) n=643 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 21.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.0% (9.5–31.0%) n=643 |
| Homeownership rate | 76.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.2% (56.5–91.0%) n=643 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 11.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.3% (0.0–6.1%) n=643 |
| Foreign-born population | 4.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.0–9.3%) n=645 |
| Single-parent households | 28.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.7% (39.5–66.1%) n=640 |
| Population 65+ | 0.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.4% (11.9–29.5%) n=645 |
| Median age | 27.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.3 yr (33.1–52.0) n=642 |
| Median household income | $53,750 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,728 ($43,042–$88,542) n=616 |
| Median home value | $48,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $142,200 ($83,960–$248,900) n=615 |
| Median gross rent | $746 | $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 | 78.6 yr ± 2.39 | 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 2.39 years of 78.6, 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