ZIP code
75956
in Kirbyville, TexasPopulation 6,982
32.81/ 100
Ranked #30,096 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 6.2%)
Ranked #1,784 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (bottom 4.5%)
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.
Arsenic in groundwater
0.94%
in the bottom 1.3% 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 ›Mammography
65.7%
in the bottom 3.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST3rdUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Humid extreme heat
155.3 days/year
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year when modeled heat stress — temperature, humidity, sun, and wind combined — reaches levels hard on the body outdoors.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
24.4%
in the top 8.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
12.7%
in the top 7.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Mobility disability
22.6%
in the top 7.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Self-care disability
6.5%
in the top 8.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Stroke
5.5%
in the top 7.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
29.5%
in the top 9.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
57.5%
in the bottom 8.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST28thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›The read
Kirbyville, Texas (ZIP 75956), on the composite measure, lands in the bottom 6.2% nationally (30,096th) and the bottom 4.5% of Texas (1,784th).
The profile cuts both ways, and the readings bear that out: modeled arsenic sits in the bottom 1.3% nationally. Working the other way, modeled mammography registers in the bottom 3.6% nationally, humid heat lands in the top 3.3% nationally, and tooth loss resides in the top 8.1% nationally. Modeled independent living disability lies in the top 7.9% nationally, and mobility disability settles in the top 7.8% nationally. Modeled self-care disability stands in the top 8.5% nationally, and stroke is in the top 7.8% nationally. Modeled fair or poor health rests in the top 9.3% nationally, and colon screening sits in the bottom 8.2% nationally.
In everyday language, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 75951, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 61%
14%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 9%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 28%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 9%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 6%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 13%
8%
Disability
healthier than 8%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 11%
5%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 41%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 58%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 43%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 3%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 20%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 32%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 6%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 3%
8%
Disability
healthier than 9%
7%
“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
2 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 75.4 ± 1.8 years. A median household income of $62,196 predicts 78.2 years — 2.8 years below.
Ranked #3,867 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 62.2; chronic-disease standing 8.9 (bottom 10%) — 53 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #2,244 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
75928
Texasshares a border
Score 30.75
Closest healthier
75951
Texasshares a border
Score 37.08
Similar health profile
74881
Oklahoma99% similar profile
Score 38.29
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 | 33.3% | 30.1–36.7 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 44.9% | 40.9–48.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.2% | 8.4–10.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.4% | 10.2–12.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.9% | 9.0–10.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 12.4% | 11.2–13.7 |
| Depression among adults | 25.7% | 22.3–29.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 17.5% | 15.5–19.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.6% | 37.5–45.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 42.5% | 34.7–50.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.5% | 5.1–5.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 24.4% | 20.7–28.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 15.1% | 13.2–17.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.1% | 77.7–82.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 76.3% | 72.9–79.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.4% | 82.7–86.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 57.5% | 52.5–62.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 44.2% | 40.8–47.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 65.7% | 57.5–73.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.6% | 12.2–17.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 21.5% | 19.0–24.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 35.7% | 30.9–40.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 41.8% | 35.5–48.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 29.5% | 26.4–32.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.3% | 18.3–22.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 18.6% | 16.7–20.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 19.1% | 17.2–21.0 |
| Any disability among adults | 41.3% | 36.8–45.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.2% | 9.2–11.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.7% | 11.5–14.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 22.6% | 20.2–25.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.9–7.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.1% | 7.5–8.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 27.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 8.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 9.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 89.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 17.2% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 84.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 53.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 23.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 45.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $62,196 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $156,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $756 | $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 | 75.4 yr ± 0.90 | 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 0.90 years of 75.4, 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