ZIP code
74145
in Tulsa, OklahomaPopulation 18,196
45.62/ 100
Ranked #21,748 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 32%)
Ranked #135 of 634 Oklahoma ZIPs (top 21%)
Ranked #23 of 88 Tulsa, OK ZIPs (top 26%)
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
1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.28 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Recreation access
1.4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Tree cover
0.00%
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 5.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Transit access
3.9 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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 ›Dry extreme heat
50.3 days/year
in the top 9.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST26thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
0.82%
in the top 10.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Civic-institution access
0.55 per 1,000 residents
in the top 11.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS89thDefinition & 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 ›Walkability
95 intersections/sq mi
in the top 11.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS89thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 74145, one of several in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on the composite measure, lands in the bottom 32% nationally (21,748th) and the top 21% of Oklahoma (135th).
The main burdens in the data show plainly and lead the picture: modeled tree cover is at the national minimum, industrial-pollution burden rests in the top 5.4% nationally, and extreme heat sits in the top 9.4% nationally. Modeled fine-particle registers in the top 10.3% nationally. More positively, outpatient lands in the top 1.9% nationally, and mental-health providers resides in the top 2.4% nationally. Recreation lies in the top 3.8% nationally, and transit settles in the top 7.5% nationally. Civic stands in the top 11.0% nationally, and walkability is in the top 11.1% nationally.
Set against the neighboring ZIPs, outer-floodplain exposure runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In everyday language, 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. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 74133, 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
Healthcare Access
healthier than 91%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 58%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 47%
11%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 35%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 27%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 18%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 14%
8%
Disability
healthier than 27%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 28%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 85%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 76%
11%
Disability
healthier than 68%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 92%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 92%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 41%
13%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 24%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 22%
8%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 74%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 68%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 89%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 97%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 53%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 50%
14%
Disability
healthier than 55%
7%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 39%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 26%
8%
“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 78.3 ± 1.5 years. The 48 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 75.9 years — 2.4 years above them.
Ranked #1,217 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
74129
Oklahomashares a border
Score 34.78
Closest healthier
74133
Oklahomashares a border
Score 54.35
Similar health profile
72801
Arkansas96% similar profile
Score 39.73
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 | 25.2% | 23.1–27.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.3% | 33.7–39.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.3% | 6.7–8.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.6% | 10.4–13.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.9% | 6.3–7.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.8% | 7.0–8.7 |
| Depression among adults | 27.4% | 24.7–30.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.1% | 10.9–13.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.2% | 32.5–38.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.7% | 33.0–40.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.7% | 3.4–4.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 15.8% | 13.2–18.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 13.8% | 12.1–15.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.8% | 73.5–78.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 76.3% | 73.6–79.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.7% | 81.9–85.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 62.0% | 57.9–66.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 56.9% | 53.9–60.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.8% | 66.4–78.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.0% | 11.2–15.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.6% | 13.8–17.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 33.1% | 30.0–36.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.5% | 32.7–40.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.2% | 20.1–24.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.7% | 16.9–20.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.4% | 12.9–16.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.2% | 16.5–20.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 40.3% | 37.2–43.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.7% | 7.9–9.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.2% | 9.2–11.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.0% | 15.3–18.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.1–4.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.5% | 6.0–7.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 27.5% | 24.0–31.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 21.3% | 18.8–23.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 17.8% | 15.6–20.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.8% | 14.7–18.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 11.0% | 9.8–12.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.4% | 32.1–40.6 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 12.3% | 10.7–13.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | OK median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 13.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 16.3% (6.5–26.1%) n=643 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 25.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 19.4% (9.5–30.7%) n=643 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 10.9% (4.8–18.9%) n=644 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 27.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 18.4% (9.0–38.4%) n=644 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.1% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.3% (0.4–8.8%) n=643 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.6% (0.0–9.0%) n=643 |
| Broadband subscription | 90.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 85.4% (70.2–95.0%) n=643 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 29.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 20.0% (9.5–31.0%) n=643 |
| Homeownership rate | 57.3% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 78.2% (56.5–91.0%) n=643 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 4.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 2.3% (0.0–6.1%) n=643 |
| Foreign-born population | 14.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.0–9.3%) n=645 |
| Single-parent households | 45.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 51.7% (39.5–66.1%) n=640 |
| Population 65+ | 15.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 18.4% (11.9–29.5%) n=645 |
| Median age | 34.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.3 yr (33.1–52.0) n=642 |
| Median household income | $58,706 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $58,728 ($43,042–$88,542) n=616 |
| Median home value | $171,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $142,200 ($83,960–$248,900) n=615 |
| Median gross rent | $1,056 | $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 ± 0.77 | 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 0.77 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