ZIP code
76538
in Jonesboro, TexasPopulation 882
44.48/ 100
Ranked #22,938 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 28%)
Ranked #1,033 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (bottom 45%)
Ranked #21 of 31 Killeen-Temple, TX ZIPs (bottom 32%)
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
88.8 days/year
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST67thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Walkability
1.4 intersections/sq mi
in the bottom 4.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST3rdUS4thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
1.1%
in the bottom 4.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS5thDefinition & 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 ›PFAS in drinking water
7.8%
in the bottom 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS5thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a community health center
21.5 mi
in the top 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest federally funded community health center, which serves patients regardless of ability to pay.
Full methodology ›Radon
0.8 pCi/L
in the bottom 9.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST50thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The modeled typical indoor radon level for this area, in picocuries per liter — the EPA recommends fixing a home at 4 pCi/L or above.
Modeled from indoor-radon measurements. In Alaska and Hawaii, where those measurements are not published, a US Geological Survey geologic radon-potential category stands in — a coarser input, disclosed rather than hidden.
Full methodology ›The read
By the composite health measure, Jonesboro, Texas (ZIP 76538) ranks in the bottom 28% nationally (22,938th) and the bottom 45% of Texas (1,033rd), based on limited data; treat as directional.
The picture here is genuinely mixed, with readings on both sides: modeled arsenic sits in the bottom 4.6% nationally, and pfas is in the bottom 4.7% nationally. Modeled industrial-pollution burden settles in the bottom 4.8% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise resides at the national minimum, shared with about 22% of ZIPs. Modeled radon registers in the bottom 9.3% nationally. On the other side, modeled extreme heat rests in the top 3.3% nationally, walkability stands in the bottom 4.4% nationally, and distance to a community health center lies in the top 7.4% nationally. Fiber broadband lands at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Poverty sits in the top 12.4% nationally.
To spell things out, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Pfas is the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down; here a modeled estimate of the chance a private well contains them. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Close by, ZIP 76457, 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
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 93%
14%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 44%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 47%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 41%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 33%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 35%
13%
Disability
healthier than 37%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the bottom 0.5%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 6%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 89%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 80%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 66%
11%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 46%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 19%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 38%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 37%
8%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 3%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 5%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
in the top 0.00%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 94%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 84%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 92%
8%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 51%
16%
Disability
healthier than 42%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 7%
21%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 1%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the bottom 0.00%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
76457
Texasshares a border
Score 45.74
Closest healthier
76566
Texasshares a border
Score 46.15
Similar health profile
79534
Texas99% similar profile
Score 44.67
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 | 32.2% | 29.4–35.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 39.8% | 36.4–43.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.2% | 9.4–11.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.6% | 9.6–11.7 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.1% | 7.3–9.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.9% | 7.7–10.1 |
| Depression among adults | 24.2% | 21.5–27.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.1% | 12.5–15.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 40.7% | 37.2–44.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.3% | 30.8–42.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.2% | 3.8–4.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 15.9% | 13.6–18.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.2% | 10.3–14.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 80.6% | 78.4–82.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.0% | 75.3–80.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.9% | 86.4–89.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.5% | 59.3–67.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 57.5% | 54.5–60.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.7% | 65.4–77.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.4% | 13.4–17.7 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 14.7% | 12.6–17.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 27.9% | 24.3–31.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 37.1% | 32.0–42.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.2% | 19.4–25.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.0% | 15.3–18.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.4% | 13.7–17.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.8% | 13.2–16.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.5% | 30.9–38.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.9% | 8.0–9.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.2% | 8.1–10.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.5% | 15.3–19.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.5% | 3.9–5.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.7% | 5.0–6.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 23.7% | 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+) | 7.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 28.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 85.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 31.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 84.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 1.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 62.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 33.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 53.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $63,750 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $122,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $867 | $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 ± 1.39 | 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 1.39 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