ZIP code
74053
in Oologah, OklahomaPopulation 5,375
44.25/ 100
Ranked #23,173 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 28%)
Ranked #159 of 634 Oklahoma ZIPs (top 25%)
Ranked #27 of 88 Tulsa, OK ZIPs (top 31%)
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.
Mammography
67.1%
in the bottom 5.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST42ndUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Dry extreme heat
49.5 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 ›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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
0.82%
in the top 11.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS88thDefinition & source ›
The share of days in the year when modeled fine-particle (PM2.5) pollution was above the EPA’s daily limit of 35 micrograms per cubic meter.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
8.1%
in the top 22% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS78thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
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 ›The read
Overall, Oologah, Oklahoma (ZIP 74053) lands in the bottom 28% nationally (23,173rd) and the top 25% of Oklahoma (159th).
The picture here is genuinely mixed, with readings on both sides: lead in tap water is in the bottom 18% nationally. On the other side, modeled mammography settles in the bottom 5.7% nationally, and extreme heat resides in the top 9.6% nationally. Modeled industrial-pollution burden registers in the top 11.6% nationally, modeled fine-particle rests in the top 11.7% nationally, and floodplain exposure stands in the top 12.5% nationally. Crowded housing lies in the top 14.4% nationally, distance to a community health center lands in the top 14.7% nationally, and slow internet speeds sits in the top 15% nationally. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility is at the national minimum, shared with about 31% of ZIPs.
A note on the terms: industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility is a plant handling large amounts of hazardous chemicals that must file an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 74017, just across the boundary, ranks better 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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 45%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 54%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 41%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 23%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 22%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 22%
8%
Disability
healthier than 35%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 12%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 17%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 78%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 84%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 69%
11%
Disability
healthier than 77%
7%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 53%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 43%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 21%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 18%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 66%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 76%
16%
Disability
healthier than 70%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 43%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 51%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 58%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 51%
8%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 21%
5%
Healthcare Access
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 79.8 ± 3.2 years. The 49 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 75.8 years — 4.0 years above them.
Ranked #362 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
74017
Oklahomashares a border
Score 44.31
Closest healthier
74019
Oklahomashares a border
Score 48.41
Similar health profile
75573
Texas97% similar profile
Score 38.81
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% | 24.5–30.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.5% | 33.8–41.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.0% | 7.2–8.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.0% | 10.6–13.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.1% | 6.4–7.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.1% | 7.1–9.1 |
| Depression among adults | 26.0% | 22.5–29.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.5% | 10.9–14.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.6% | 33.8–41.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 41.2% | 35.1–47.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–3.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 15.2% | 12.5–18.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.6% | 7.2–10.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.0% | 71.9–77.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.2% | 73.8–80.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.9% | 83.0–86.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.1% | 58.2–67.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 59.8% | 56.1–63.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 67.1% | 58.2–75.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.6% | 12.1–17.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.7% | 15.1–20.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 29.3% | 25.0–33.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.0% | 30.4–42.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.6% | 17.0–22.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.3% | 16.2–20.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.6% | 12.9–16.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.5% | 15.5–19.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 38.1% | 33.8–42.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.0% | 7.9–10.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.4% | 8.3–10.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 16.3% | 14.3–18.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–6.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.9% | 21.3–28.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.0% | 13.6–18.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 13.1% | 11.0–15.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.6% | 10.8–14.7 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.0% | 7.9–10.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.6% | 27.8–37.6 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 9.4% | 8.1–10.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OK median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 6.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 16.3% (6.5–26.1%) n=643 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 12.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 19.4% (9.5–30.7%) n=643 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.9% (4.8–18.9%) n=644 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 21.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.4% (9.0–38.4%) n=644 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.3% (0.4–8.8%) n=643 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.0–9.0%) n=643 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 85.4% (70.2–95.0%) n=643 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 16.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.0% (9.5–31.0%) n=643 |
| Homeownership rate | 82.3% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.2% (56.5–91.0%) n=643 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 4.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.3% (0.0–6.1%) n=643 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.0–9.3%) n=645 |
| Single-parent households | 56.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.7% (39.5–66.1%) n=640 |
| Population 65+ | 16.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.4% (11.9–29.5%) n=645 |
| Median age | 39.8 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.3 yr (33.1–52.0) n=642 |
| Median household income | $90,494 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,728 ($43,042–$88,542) n=616 |
| Median home value | $239,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $142,200 ($83,960–$248,900) n=615 |
| Median gross rent | $1,017 | $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 | 79.8 yr ± 1.64 | 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 1.64 years of 79.8, 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