ZIP code
75966
in Newton, TexasPopulation 4,994
30.90/ 100
Ranked #30,567 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 4.7%)
Ranked #1,807 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (bottom 3.3%)
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.
Arsenic in groundwater
0.93%
in the bottom 1.2% 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
7.4%
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
14.0%
in the top 4.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & 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
24.9%
in the top 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Stroke
6.1%
in the top 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
44.1%
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
31.7%
in the top 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
19%
in the top 5.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Mammography
66.9%
in the bottom 5.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST6thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Unemployment rate
13.7%
in the top 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.
Full methodology ›The read
Newton, Texas (ZIP 75966), by its composite score, sits in the bottom 4.7% nationally (30,567th) and the bottom 3.3% of Texas (1,807th).
The measures that define this area's challenges come through directly: modeled self-care disability sits in the top 4.4% nationally, and independent living disability lies in the top 4.1% nationally. Modeled mobility disability rests in the top 3.6% nationally, and stroke resides in the top 3.6% nationally. Modeled short sleep is in the top 4.4% nationally, fair or poor health lands in the top 5.7% nationally, and diabetes stands in the top 5.6% nationally. Modeled mammography registers in the bottom 5.3% nationally, and unemployment settles in the top 4.7% nationally. On the stronger side, modeled arsenic sits in the bottom 1.2% nationally.
For anyone unfamiliar, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 70639, 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 93%
14%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 6%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 13%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 10%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 4%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 13%
8%
Disability
healthier than 4%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 13%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 88%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 69%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 1%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 5%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 36%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 4%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 4%
8%
Disability
healthier than 4%
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
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.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 92.4 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 5.5 (bottom 10%) — 87 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #209 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
70639
Louisianashares a border
Score 32.32
Closest healthier
70653
Louisianashares a border
Score 38.03
Similar health profile
71646
Arkansas99% similar profile
Score 28.90
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 | 34.3% | 30.7–37.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 46.7% | 42.3–50.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.9% | 8.1–9.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.8% | 10.5–13.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.4% | 9.4–11.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 13.0% | 11.6–14.4 |
| Depression among adults | 25.1% | 21.5–28.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 19.0% | 16.8–21.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 41.2% | 36.8–45.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 43.3% | 34.7–51.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 6.1% | 5.6–6.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 24.3% | 20.1–28.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 15.9% | 13.7–18.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 81.2% | 78.6–83.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.4% | 73.8–80.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.1% | 82.1–85.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 58.6% | 52.8–64.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 43.5% | 39.6–47.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 66.9% | 57.4–75.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.7% | 11.2–16.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 22.1% | 19.5–24.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 37.6% | 32.5–42.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 44.1% | 36.5–51.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 31.7% | 28.4–35.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 20.7% | 18.6–22.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 19.3% | 17.3–21.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 20.2% | 18.1–22.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 43.9% | 39.3–48.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.4% | 9.3–11.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 14.0% | 12.6–15.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 24.9% | 22.2–27.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 7.4% | 6.7–8.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 9.2% | 8.4–10.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 23.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 35.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 13.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 7.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 13.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 8.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 16.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 73.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 6.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 54.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 21.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 41.8 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $40,087 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $102,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $1,049 | $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 | 76.5 yr ± 0.83 | 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 0.83 years of 76.5, 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