ZIP code
74055
in Owasso, OklahomaPopulation 51,381
52.41/ 100
Ranked #12,891 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 40%)
Ranked #43 of 634 Oklahoma ZIPs (top 6.8%)
Ranked #9 of 88 Tulsa, OK ZIPs (top 10.3%)
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 4.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 5.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 6.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Dry extreme heat
51.7 days/year
in the top 8.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST33rdUS91stDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
10 µg/L
in the bottom 9.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST11thUS10thDefinition & 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
243 units
in the top 10.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
0.82%
in the top 10.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Dental provider access
0.74 per 1,000 residents
in the top 12.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS87thDefinition & 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 ›Home broadband subscription
95.7%
in the top 16% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS84thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
10.0%
in the bottom 16% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS16thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›The read
Owasso, Oklahoma (ZIP 74055), in overall standing, comes out in the top 40% healthiest ZIPs nationally (12,891st) and the top 6.8% of Oklahoma (43rd).
The measures that most flatter this area set the tone for the rest: distance to an emergency room stands at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Lithium in drinking water resides in the bottom 9.6% nationally, subsidized affordable housing sits in the top 10.2% nationally, and dental providers stands in the top 12.8% nationally. Distance to a nursing home resides at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Against that, modeled disaster risk sits in the top 4.9% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden stands in the top 5.6% nationally. Modeled expected annual loss resides in the top 6.9% nationally, and extreme heat sits in the top 8.9% nationally. Modeled fine-particle stands in the top 10.5% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. 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. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. 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 74114, about 6.7 miles away.
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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 75%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 71%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 73%
11%
Disability
healthier than 65%
7%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 41%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 10%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 29%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 17%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 92%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 93%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 85%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 92%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 62%
8%
Disability
healthier than 93%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 45%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 59%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 89%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 91%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 86%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 88%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 72%
8%
Disability
healthier than 93%
7%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 46%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 37%
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
3 of our published findings list 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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 78.3 ± 0.9 years. A median household income of $87,506 predicts 79.6 years — 1.2 years below.
Ranked #1,557 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 78.3 ± 0.9 years. The 49 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 76.5 years — 1.9 years above them.
Ranked #1,433 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 10.1; chronic-disease standing 74.9 — 65 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #15,893 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, 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
74114
Oklahomaabout 6.7 mi away
Score 57.50
Similar health profile
95973
California97% similar profile
Score 54.01
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 | 24.3% | 22.4–26.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 33.4% | 31.0–35.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.9% | 7.3–8.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.1% | 10.2–12.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.9% | 5.4–6.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.2% | 5.6–6.8 |
| Depression among adults | 26.6% | 24.3–29.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.0% | 9.1–11.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.1% | 32.7–37.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 34.5% | 31.1–38.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.0% | 2.8–3.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.8% | 10.1–13.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.3% | 7.3–9.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.3% | 73.1–77.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 76.9% | 74.5–79.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.2% | 84.8–87.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 64.7% | 61.3–67.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 64.0% | 61.4–66.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.3% | 69.2–79.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.8% | 13.0–16.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.9% | 11.6–14.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.5% | 23.1–28.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.1% | 30.9–37.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 16.3% | 14.8–17.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.8% | 15.4–18.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.2% | 11.1–13.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.9% | 13.7–16.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 33.7% | 31.1–36.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.7% | 7.1–8.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.6% | 7.0–8.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.2% | 12.1–14.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.2% | 2.9–3.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.3% | 4.0–4.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.1% | 21.4–26.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.7% | 11.2–14.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.6% | 8.3–10.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.8% | 9.5–12.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.2% | 6.5–8.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.3% | 29.9–36.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.8% | 6.9–8.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OK median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 6.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 16.3% (6.5–26.1%) n=643 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 10.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 19.4% (9.5–30.7%) n=643 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.9% (4.8–18.9%) n=644 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 37.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.4% (9.0–38.4%) n=644 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.3% (0.4–8.8%) n=643 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.0–9.0%) n=643 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 85.4% (70.2–95.0%) n=643 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.0% (9.5–31.0%) n=643 |
| Homeownership rate | 70.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.2% (56.5–91.0%) n=643 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.3% (0.0–6.1%) n=643 |
| Foreign-born population | 5.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.0–9.3%) n=645 |
| Single-parent households | 51.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.7% (39.5–66.1%) n=640 |
| Population 65+ | 14.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.4% (11.9–29.5%) n=645 |
| Median age | 37.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.3 yr (33.1–52.0) n=642 |
| Median household income | $87,506 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,728 ($43,042–$88,542) n=616 |
| Median home value | $281,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $142,200 ($83,960–$248,900) n=615 |
| Median gross rent | $1,268 | $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 | 78.3 yr ± 0.47 | 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 0.47 years of 78.3, 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