ZIP code
76354
in Burkburnett, TexasPopulation 11,990
46.10/ 100
Ranked #21,237 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 34%)
Ranked #854 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 46%)
Ranked #9 of 20 Wichita Falls, TX ZIPs (top 45%)
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
91.7 days/year
in the top 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST81stUS98thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
12.9%
in the top 5.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a Superfund site
55.9 mi
in the top 9.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST84thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Superfund site — an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has listed for cleanup.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
11 µg/L
in the bottom 10.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS11thDefinition & 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 ›Fiber broadband
93.7%
in the top 12.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS88thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
0.27%
in the top 41% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS59thDefinition & source ›
The share of days in the year when modeled fine-particle (PM2.5) pollution was above the EPA’s daily limit of 35 micrograms per cubic meter.
Full methodology ›The read
By its overall health score, Burkburnett, Texas (ZIP 76354) lands in the bottom 34% nationally (21,237th) and the top 46% of Texas (854th).
The measures split the difference for this area: distance to a Superfund site resides in the top 9.9% nationally, and lithium in drinking water lands in the bottom 10.6% nationally. Fiber broadband registers in the top 12.0% nationally. Distance to a nursing home sits at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Against that, modeled extreme heat rests in the top 2.5% nationally, transportation noise is in the top 5.6% nationally, and industrial-pollution burden stands in the top 12.3% nationally. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility settles at the national minimum, shared with about 31% of ZIPs. Floodplain exposure lies in the top 16% nationally, and PFAS in drinking water resides in the top 16% nationally.
Weighed against the ZIPs nearby, outer-floodplain exposure runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To translate a couple of terms, distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Overall, the nearest healthier neighbor is ZIP 76367, 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 Wichita Falls, TX metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 59%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 52%
16%
Disability
healthier than 44%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 46%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 22%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 24%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 40%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 24%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 6%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 65%
13%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 46%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 49%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 57%
11%
Disability
healthier than 53%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 42%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 14%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 28%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 64%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 73%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 82%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 73%
11%
Disability
healthier than 64%
7%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 45%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 27%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 27%
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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 76.5 ± 1.6 years. A median household income of $68,721 predicts 78.6 years — 2.1 years below.
Ranked #2,886 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
73531
Oklahomashares a border
Score 36.37
Closest healthier
76367
Texasshares a border
Score 49.01
Similar health profile
75651
Texas98% similar profile
Score 44.25
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 | 27.1% | 23.8–30.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 36.4% | 32.1–40.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.5% | 7.7–9.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.7% | 9.4–12.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.9% | 6.1–7.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.0% | 7.0–9.0 |
| Depression among adults | 25.3% | 21.5–29.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.2% | 10.5–13.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.5% | 32.0–40.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 34.7% | 26.8–42.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.7% | 3.4–4.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.4% | 11.1–16.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.7% | 11.0–14.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.7% | 73.6–79.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.4% | 71.4–78.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.5% | 83.6–87.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.4% | 58.2–68.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 58.8% | 55.3–62.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.6% | 64.5–80.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.6% | 14.4–20.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.3% | 13.0–17.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 26.0% | 21.6–30.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.0% | 29.5–43.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 21.2% | 18.5–24.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.4% | 16.3–20.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.4% | 12.7–16.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.8% | 14.0–17.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 33.4% | 28.9–37.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.8% | 6.9–8.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.2% | 8.1–10.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.7% | 13.6–17.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.2% | 3.7–4.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–6.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 15.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 16.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 24.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 7.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 23.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 70.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 49.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 19.1% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 41.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $68,721 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $159,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $964 | $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 ± 0.84 | 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 0.84 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