ZIP code
76888
in Voss, TexasPopulation 150
44.29/ 100
Ranked #23,127 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 28%)
Ranked #1,055 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (bottom 44%)
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
92.5 days/year
in the top 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
0.00%
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & 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
95.4 mi
in the top 3.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a community health center
29.5 mi
in the top 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Lithium in drinking water
9.6 µg/L
in the bottom 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS4thDefinition & 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 ›Poverty rate
34%
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFAS — man-made “forever chemicals” that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down — were 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS6thDefinition & 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 ›Walkability
1.8 intersections/sq mi
in the bottom 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST4thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Slow internet speeds
1.8%
in the top 6.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes whose fastest available download speed is under 10 Mbps.
Full methodology ›The read
In overall standing, Voss, Texas (ZIP 76888) comes out in the bottom 28% nationally (23,127th) and the bottom 44% of Texas (1,055th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
The profile opens on the burdens that define it most: modeled extreme heat lands in the top 2.3% nationally, distance to a community health center is in the top 4.2% nationally, and poverty resides in the top 4.8% nationally. PFAS in drinking water rests at the national maximum, walkability lies in the bottom 6.1% nationally, and slow internet speeds sits in the top 6.5% nationally. More positively, modeled transportation noise settles at the national minimum, and distance to a Superfund site registers in the top 3.9% nationally. Lithium in drinking water stands in the bottom 4.4% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden lands in the bottom 6.0% nationally.
In plain 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. PFAS in drinking water is the family of man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 76821, 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
in the top 0.8%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 65%
8%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 53%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 50%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 19%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 24%
16%
Disability
healthier than 34%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 1%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 3%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
in the top 0.4%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 91%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 69%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 71%
8%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 41%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 7%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 16%
16%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 5%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the bottom 0.9%
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
76821
Texasshares a border
Score 45.34
Closest healthier
76845
Texasshares a border
Score 44.54
Similar health profile
76671
Texas98% similar profile
Score 46.76
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 | 34.8% | 30.3–39.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 45.5% | 40.0–50.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 11.9% | 10.5–13.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.7% | 8.4–11.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 9.9% | 8.4–11.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.2% | 7.9–12.5 |
| Depression among adults | 22.6% | 18.8–26.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.9% | 13.3–18.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 44.5% | 39.2–49.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 37.0% | 28.1–46.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.8% | 4.0–5.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.9% | 7.9–12.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.3% | 7.2–14.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 82.2% | 79.0–85.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.1% | 75.1–82.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.6% | 87.4–91.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.6% | 61.4–71.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 56.9% | 53.1–60.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.2% | 67.8–76.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.1% | 12.2–18.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 16.1% | 12.0–20.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 27.9% | 21.6–33.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.5% | 28.7–42.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.7% | 18.1–27.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.5% | 13.1–17.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.0% | 13.2–18.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.6% | 11.0–16.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 35.4% | 29.2–41.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.3% | 8.8–11.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.8% | 7.0–10.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 18.9% | 15.1–22.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.7% | 3.7–5.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.5–6.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 34.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 14.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 27.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.8% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 11.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 64.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 66.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 19.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 54.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $60,893 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $100,000 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $530 | $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 | 82.5 yr ± 2.14 | 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 2.14 years of 82.5, 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