ZIP code
75928
in Bon Wier, TexasPopulation 899
30.75/ 100
Ranked #30,604 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 4.6%)
Ranked #1,810 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (bottom 3.2%)
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.
Short sleep
47.7%
in the top 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Unemployment rate
31%
in the top 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
0.90%
in the bottom 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Self-care disability
7.6%
in the top 3.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
27.6%
in the top 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
13.8%
in the top 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Fair or poor health
31.9%
in the top 5.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Stroke
5.9%
in the top 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
19.2%
in the top 5.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Vision disability
9.4%
in the top 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Cross-source signals
Combined exposures in this ZIP
More than one environmental exposure stands out in this ZIP. Each is established independently and shown on its own above; they are grouped here for context — not because one causes the other.
This area ranks among the highest 10% of US ZIP codes for both humid-heat days and flood exposure.
See the full flooding, evacuation & humid-heat analysis →
Health need and barriers to care documented here
On our reading, this ZIP code carries the overlap at its acute level: acute means at least three of the six health-need readings and at least three of the six access barriers apply to the same place.
These are two separate readings of public data that both apply to this place — never a claim that one causes the other, never a severity score, and never a statement about any person who lives here.
Health need documented here
- People without health insurance
- Adults reporting fair or poor health
- Chronic conditions
Barriers to reaching care
- Distance to the nearest emergency room
- Thin local supply of doctors
- Thin local supply of pharmacies
A reading appears below only where this ZIP code is among the most-affected 10% of US ZIP codes on it — one national bar, the same for every ZIP in the country.
See the full care-deserts analysis →The read
Bon Wier, Texas (ZIP 75928), overall, ranks in the bottom 4.6% nationally (30,604th) and the bottom 3.2% of Texas (1,810th).
The profile reads plainly, and several measures carry it: modeled short sleep lands in the top 1.0% nationally, unemployment lies in the top 0.8% nationally, and modeled self-care disability stands in the top 3.9% nationally. Modeled tooth loss rests in the top 4.7% nationally, independent living disability registers in the top 4.5% nationally, and fair or poor health resides in the top 5.4% nationally. Modeled stroke settles in the top 4.7% nationally, and diabetes is in the top 5.2% nationally. Modeled vision disability sits in the top 6.3% nationally. On the better side, modeled arsenic lands in the bottom 1.0% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. ZIP 70653, just across the boundary, comes out healthier overall. This area also shows documented health need overlapping with barriers to reaching care, sitting in the most-affected 10% of US ZIP codes on several need measures and several access barriers.
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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 94%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 9%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 21%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 9%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 2%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 14%
8%
Disability
healthier than 5%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 3%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 30%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 92%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 2%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 13%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 32%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 1%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 4%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 12%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 30%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
70653
Louisianashares a border
Score 38.03
Closest healthier
75933
Texasshares a border
Score 31.19
Similar health profile
71842
Arkansas99% similar profile
Score 36.57
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 | 31.4% | 28.0–34.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 46.8% | 42.5–51.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.0% | 6.3–7.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.1% | 10.8–13.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.1% | 8.2–10.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.5% | 10.2–12.9 |
| Depression among adults | 23.8% | 20.4–27.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 19.2% | 17.0–21.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.7% | 34.3–43.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 45.9% | 37.1–54.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.9% | 5.4–6.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 27.6% | 23.1–32.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 15.8% | 13.5–18.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.9% | 77.3–82.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.2% | 73.5–80.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 83.6% | 81.6–85.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 55.9% | 50.2–61.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 41.4% | 37.5–45.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 68.8% | 59.5–76.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.9% | 11.4–16.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 22.8% | 19.8–25.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 37.7% | 32.5–43.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 47.7% | 39.9–55.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 31.9% | 28.3–35.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 21.3% | 19.1–23.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 18.5% | 16.4–20.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 20.3% | 18.1–22.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 42.5% | 37.6–47.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.4% | 7.5–9.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 13.8% | 12.4–15.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 23.7% | 21.0–26.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 7.6% | 6.8–8.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 9.4% | 8.5–10.3 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 25.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 53.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 4.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 31.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 98.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 15.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 86.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 56.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 46.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 61.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $31,037 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $66,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | — | $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 at birth | 74.3 yr ± 1.10 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 78.2 yr (75.1–81.7) n=1,772 |
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 1.10 years of 74.3, 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