ZIP code
75207
in Dallas, TexasPopulation 8,287
46.68/ 100
Ranked #20,543 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 36%)
Ranked #789 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 42%)
Ranked #178 of 265 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX ZIPs (bottom 33%)
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.
Colon-cancer screening
48.8%
in the bottom 1.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST4thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
62.7%
in the top 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
8.1%
in the top 0.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Binge drinking
23%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
26.1%
in the bottom 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Pharmacy access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of pharmacies 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 ›Fatal road crashes
94.1 per 100,000 residents per year
in the top 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
0.81%
in the bottom 0.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Uninsured (under 65)
21.4%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST72ndUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
2.9%
in the bottom 1.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 75207, one of several in Dallas, Texas ranks in the bottom 36% nationally (20,543rd) and the top 42% of Texas (789th).
A number of readings press hard on the profile and set its tone: modeled colon screening rests in the bottom 1.6% nationally, and transportation noise lands in the top 0.3% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise settles in the top 0.5% nationally, and binge drinking rests in the top 1.2% nationally. Fatal road crashes lands in the top 0.6% nationally, homeownership settles in the bottom 0.9% nationally, and modeled uninsured rests in the top 3.7% nationally. On the brighter side, modeled high cholesterol lands in the bottom 1.5% nationally, pharmacy settles in the top 0.6% nationally, and modeled coronary heart disease rests in the bottom 1.4% nationally.
Against its neighbors, loud transportation noise runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 75202, 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 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 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 97%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 64%
16%
Disability
healthier than 74%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 79%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 7%
14%
Preventive Care
in the bottom 0.6%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 7%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 34%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 5%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 96%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 64%
16%
Disability
healthier than 79%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 74%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 5%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 1%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 8%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 25%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 23%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 94%
21%
Disability
healthier than 62%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 76%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 47%
16%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 3%
14%
Preventive Care
in the bottom 0.8%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 7%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 25%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 21%
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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 6.7 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 97.3 (top 10%) — 91 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,917 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
75202
Texasshares a border
Score 65.97
Closest healthier
75208
Texasshares a border
Score 52.99
Similar health profile
77531
Texas98% similar profile
Score 48.19
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 | 10.7% | 9.4–12.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 26.0% | 23.4–28.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 2.2% | 2.0–2.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.5% | 8.5–10.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 2.9% | 2.6–3.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.0% | 3.5–4.6 |
| Depression among adults | 20.7% | 18.2–23.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 7.4% | 6.5–8.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 26.1% | 23.5–28.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.9% | 32.7–41.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.0% | 1.8–2.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 22.1% | 18.6–25.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 21.4% | 18.1–24.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 56.0% | 52.2–60.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 67.6% | 63.9–71.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 75.4% | 72.3–78.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 48.8% | 44.6–52.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 45.4% | 42.5–48.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.9% | 65.4–77.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 23.0% | 19.9–26.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.6% | 13.4–18.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 26.9% | 23.5–30.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.2% | 35.4–42.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.9% | 18.2–23.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.4% | 18.3–22.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.6% | 9.3–12.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.0% | 15.9–20.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.9% | 24.7–31.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 3.6% | 3.2–4.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.3% | 7.3–9.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 8.4% | 7.3–9.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.4% | 3.0–3.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.8–6.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 11.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 10.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 20.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 27.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 36.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 0.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 10.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 57.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 1.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 32.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $84,212 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | — | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $1,852 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,154 ($764–$1,815) n=1,508 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
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