ZIP code
77613
in China, TexasPopulation 692
52.74/ 100
Ranked #12,458 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 39%)
Ranked #382 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 20%)
Ranked #2 of 30 Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX ZIPs (top 6.7%)
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.
Arsenic in groundwater
1.0%
in the bottom 2.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 2.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Humid extreme heat
154.3 days/year
in the top 3.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS97thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year when modeled heat stress — temperature, humidity, sun, and wind combined — reaches levels hard on the body outdoors.
Full methodology ›Unemployment rate
14.3%
in the top 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.
Full methodology ›Dry extreme heat
24.6 days/year
in the top 19% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS81stDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, China, Texas (ZIP 77613) lands in the top 39% healthiest ZIPs nationally (12,458th) and the top 20% of Texas (382nd), based on limited data; treat as directional.
The signals balance out across the profile, strengths against concerns: modeled arsenic lies in the bottom 2.4% nationally. Crowded housing lands at the national minimum, shared with about 29% of ZIPs. Home broadband subscription sits in the top 17% nationally. Set against that, modeled industrial-pollution burden is in the top 2.6% nationally, modeled humid heat settles in the top 3.5% nationally, and unemployment resides in the top 4.2% nationally. Slow internet speeds registers in the top 15% nationally, and modeled loud transportation noise rests in the top 16% nationally. Recreation stands at the national minimum, shared with about 35% of ZIPs. Modeled extreme heat lies in the top 19% nationally.
Set beside the nearby areas, industrial-pollution burden runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A note on the terms: arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 77706, about 5.3 miles away, ranks better 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 Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.4%
16%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 55%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 42%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 54%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 58%
8%
Disability
healthier than 54%
7%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 38%
13%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 8%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 18%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.5%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 83%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 75%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 63%
8%
Disability
healthier than 63%
7%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 42%
21%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 26%
14%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 38%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 20%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 71%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.00%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 99%
13%
Risk Behavior
in the top 0.00%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 0.00%
8%
Disability
healthier than 78%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 41%
14%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 49%
5%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 39%
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
77629
Texasshares a border
Score 49.65
Closest healthier
77706
Texasabout 5.3 mi away
Score 54.83
Similar health profile
67640
Kansas92% similar profile
Score 49.88
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 | 27.7% | 24.5–31.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 39.0% | 34.7–43.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.5% | 7.7–9.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.6% | 9.4–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.0% | 6.2–7.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.0% | 6.0–8.0 |
| Depression among adults | 21.6% | 18.3–25.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 13.4% | 11.7–15.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.1% | 32.8–41.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.9% | 29.1–45.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.8% | 9.6–14.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 11.8% | 9.8–14.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.1% | 76.3–81.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.5% | 73.8–80.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.9% | 86.2–89.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.6% | 62.2–70.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 58.2% | 54.9–61.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.6% | 64.4–77.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.0% | 13.1–19.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.9% | 10.8–15.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 25.6% | 21.3–30.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 37.6% | 32.9–42.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.5% | 17.6–23.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.0% | 14.9–19.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.4% | 11.8–15.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.0% | 12.2–15.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 32.5% | 28.1–37.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.4% | 6.6–8.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.3% | 7.2–9.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.8% | 13.7–18.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.5–4.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.1% | 4.6–5.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 29.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.2% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 22.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 14.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.1% | 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) | 27.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 82.7% | 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 | 6.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 51.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 24.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 42.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $72,667 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $190,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $1,028 | $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 | 79.2 yr ± 1.14 | 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 1.14 years of 79.2, 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