ZIP code
76501
in Temple, TexasPopulation 17,752
36.71/ 100
Ranked #28,666 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 10.7%)
Ranked #1,663 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (bottom 11.0%)
Ranked #26 of 31 Killeen-Temple, TX ZIPs (bottom 16%)
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
93.1 days/year
in the top 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Uninsured (under 65)
20.3%
in the top 4.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST68thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Obesity
46.7%
in the top 2.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
43.5%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
74 µg/L
in the top 5.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Vision disability
8.8%
in the top 8.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST81stUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
29.6%
in the top 9.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.12 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics 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 ›The read
By the composite measure, ZIP 76501, one of several in Temple, Texas sits in the bottom 10.7% nationally (28,666th) and the bottom 11.0% of Texas (1,663rd).
What the numbers press hardest on defines much of the story here: modeled extreme heat lies in the top 2.1% nationally, uninsured settles in the top 4.3% nationally, and obesity stands in the top 2.4% nationally. Modeled short sleep is in the top 5.5% nationally, lithium in drinking water rests in the top 5.2% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden sits in the top 6.3% nationally. Modeled vision disability registers in the top 8.3% nationally, and fair or poor health lands in the top 9.1% nationally. Modeled self-care disability resides in the top 8.5% nationally. On the encouraging side, mental-health providers lies in the top 9.0% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs that surround it, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain language, 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. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. ZIP 76502, just across the boundary, ranks healthier overall.
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 Killeen-Temple, TX metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 85%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 23%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 28%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 12%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 12%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 20%
8%
Disability
healthier than 12%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 7%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 83%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 41%
13%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 11%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 20%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 12%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 18%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 8%
8%
Disability
healthier than 13%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 34%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 94%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 41%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 53%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
in the bottom 0.00%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 29%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 29%
11%
Disability
healthier than 18%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
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
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 76.1 ± 1.4 years. A median household income of $62,532 predicts 78.2 years — 2.2 years below.
Ranked #2,938 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
76502
Texasshares a border
Score 49.16
Closest healthier
76504
Texasshares a border
Score 40.23
Similar health profile
75901
Texas99% similar profile
Score 37.09
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 | 29.6% | 26.9–32.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 40.5% | 37.2–43.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.3% | 6.6–8.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.2% | 9.9–12.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.1% | 7.3–8.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.2% | 8.3–10.2 |
| Depression among adults | 25.1% | 22.1–28.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 17.7% | 15.8–19.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.5% | 33.0–40.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 46.7% | 41.7–51.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.8% | 4.4–5.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 21.6% | 18.5–25.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 20.3% | 18.1–22.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.6% | 74.9–80.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.5% | 74.5–80.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.4% | 82.7–86.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 60.5% | 56.0–65.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 48.6% | 45.4–51.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.3% | 65.4–78.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.3% | 11.2–15.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.0% | 15.0–19.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 36.5% | 32.8–40.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 43.5% | 39.1–48.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 29.6% | 26.8–32.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.2% | 17.3–21.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.5% | 15.7–19.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.8% | 17.0–20.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 41.0% | 37.3–44.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.3% | 7.4–9.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.7% | 10.5–12.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 21.3% | 19.2–23.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.9–7.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.8% | 8.1–9.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 20.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 26.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 14.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 20.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 10.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 79.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 63.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 5.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 43.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 14.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 36.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $62,532 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $172,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $1,021 | $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 | 76.1 yr ± 0.69 | 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 0.69 years of 76.1, 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