ZIP code
76021
in Bedford, TexasPopulation 35,354
56.16/ 100
Ranked #8,109 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 25%)
Ranked #248 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 13.3%)
Ranked #81 of 265 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX ZIPs (top 31%)
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.
Dry extreme heat
92.2 days/year
in the top 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS98thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
83 µg/L
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Walkability
140 intersections/sq mi
in the top 5.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›PFOS in drinking water
94.6%
in the top 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOS, one of the most common “forever chemicals,” was detected in EPA testing.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
0.96 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of dental offices 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
38.9 per million
in the top 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Mammography
80.2%
in the top 10.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Child-care access
0.43 per 1,000 residents
in the top 14.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS85thDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›The read
ZIP 76021, one of several in Bedford, Texas, on the composite measure, lands in the top 25% healthiest ZIPs nationally (8,109th) and the top 13.3% of Texas (248th).
The profile cuts both ways, and the readings bear that out: walkability stands in the top 5.8% nationally, and dental providers is in the top 7.4% nationally. Working the other way, modeled extreme heat rests in the top 2.3% nationally, lithium in drinking water sits in the top 4.4% nationally, and PFOS in drinking water registers in the top 6.8% nationally. Modeled air-toxics cancer risk lands in the top 7.4% nationally, and disaster risk resides in the top 7.6% nationally. Modeled industrial-pollution burden lies in the top 7.6% nationally, and homeownership settles in the bottom 10.1% nationally. Modeled tree cover stands in the bottom 11.0% nationally.
Set against the neighboring ZIPs, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In everyday language, lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. PFOS in drinking water is a common one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 76034, 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 82%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 74%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 69%
11%
Disability
healthier than 80%
7%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 52%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 57%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 47%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 31%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 8%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 73%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 75%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 90%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 85%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 62%
8%
Disability
healthier than 82%
7%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 42%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 19%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 39%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 61%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 90%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 77%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 65%
8%
Disability
healthier than 66%
7%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 52%
21%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 24%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 37%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 29%
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
3 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.
Above its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 80.4 ± 1.6 years. The 40 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 78.3 years — 2.1 years above them.
Ranked #1,343 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 31.4; chronic-disease standing 82.1 — 51 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #14,456 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Highest-risk tenth
Air toxics and the years between the two ends of the risk scale
Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is 38.9 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 80.4 ± 1.6 years.
Ranked #1,631 of the 4,173 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by modeled air-toxics risk, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
76022
Texasshares a border
Score 52.00
Closest healthier
76034
Texasshares a border
Score 66.75
Similar health profile
31324
Georgia99% similar profile
Score 60.32
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 | 24.6% | 22.2–27.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.3% | 29.4–35.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.6% | 7.8–9.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.0% | 8.9–11.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.6% | 5.0–6.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.1 |
| Depression among adults | 23.2% | 20.5–26.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.7% | 9.4–12.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.2% | 32.0–38.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 30.2% | 26.3–34.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.0% | 2.8–3.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.4% | 7.0–10.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.3% | 10.0–12.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.8% | 72.8–78.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.1% | 72.1–77.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.9% | 86.4–89.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.7% | 63.1–70.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 64.2% | 61.5–66.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.2% | 75.2–84.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.4% | 14.1–18.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.6% | 9.2–12.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.1% | 20.2–26.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.7% | 33.2–40.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.0% | 15.1–18.9 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.9% | 14.3–17.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.9% | 10.6–13.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.5% | 11.2–13.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 27.8% | 24.8–30.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.2% | 5.5–7.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.8% | 6.2–7.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.7% | 11.2–14.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.8–3.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.8–4.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 15.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 5.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 48.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 37.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 51.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 13.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 47.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 18.1% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 39.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $87,097 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $374,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $1,502 | $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 | 80.4 yr ± 0.82 | 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 0.82 years of 80.4, 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