ZIP code
77979
in Port Lavaca, TexasPopulation 16,488
46.39/ 100
Ranked #20,878 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 35%)
Ranked #819 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 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.
Uninsured (under 65)
23%
in the top 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST76thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Distance to a Superfund site
In this ZIP
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the top 3.0% 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
155 days/year
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Outer-floodplain exposure
9.4%
in the top 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 0.2%-annual-chance flood band — the “500-year” zone, a lower but real 1-in-500 yearly chance.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 5.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS95thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
41.3%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 8.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›PFOA in drinking water
91%
in the top 8.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOA, one of the man-made “forever chemicals,” was 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 ›PFOS in drinking water
91%
in the top 8.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOS, one of the most common “forever chemicals,” was 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 ›Cross-source signals
Combined exposures in this ZIP
More than one environmental exposure stands out in this ZIP. Each is established independently and shown on its own above; they are grouped here for context — not because one causes the other.
This area ranks among the highest 10% of US ZIP codes for both humid-heat days and flood exposure.
See the full flooding, evacuation & humid-heat analysis →
The read
Overall, Port Lavaca, Texas (ZIP 77979) lands in the bottom 35% nationally (20,878th) and the top 44% of Texas (819th).
A number of measures mark where this area is under strain: modeled uninsured stands in the top 3.0% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site lies at the national minimum. Modeled industrial-pollution burden lands in the top 3.0% nationally, and humid heat sits in the top 3.3% nationally. Outer-floodplain exposure is in the top 4.0% nationally, modeled expected annual loss settles in the top 5.3% nationally, and floodplain exposure resides in the top 5.9% nationally. Modeled disaster risk registers in the top 8.2% nationally, and PFOA in drinking water rests in the top 8.3% nationally. On the brighter side, distance to an emergency room stands at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs.
Set beside the nearby areas, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A note on the terms: distance to a Superfund site is an abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous-waste site the EPA has identified for cleanup. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 77465, just across the boundary, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 68%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 75%
8%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 56%
16%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 13%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 9%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 36%
11%
Disability
healthier than 37%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 3%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 17%
5%
Lifting this score
Mental Health
healthier than 82%
8%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 57%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 54%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 53%
11%
Disability
healthier than 46%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 9%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 35%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 11%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 19%
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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 14.0; chronic-disease standing 68.1 — 54 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #14,813 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
77465
Texasshares a border
Score 47.48
Closest healthier
77968
Texasshares a border
Score 53.25
Similar health profile
33527
Florida97% similar profile
Score 46.88
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 | 24.3% | 21.4–27.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 35.8% | 31.7–39.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 7.0% | 6.3–7.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.2% | 8.1–10.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.8% | 6.2–7.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.4% | 5.7–7.2 |
| Depression among adults | 19.9% | 16.7–23.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.7% | 12.8–16.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.1% | 33.7–42.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.0% | 27.2–43.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–3.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.9% | 11.4–16.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 23.0% | 20.2–25.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.0% | 74.1–79.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 74.2% | 70.1–78.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.4% | 83.6–87.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 60.5% | 55.2–65.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 53.3% | 49.6–57.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.7% | 63.4–79.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.9% | 13.0–19.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.8% | 11.0–14.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 31.7% | 27.0–36.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.3% | 31.5–45.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 24.7% | 21.8–27.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.2% | 14.3–18.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.8% | 13.1–16.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.4% | 13.7–17.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.2% | 29.9–38.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.8% | 6.9–8.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.7% | 7.7–9.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 16.6% | 14.6–18.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.6% | 4.2–5.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.0% | 6.4–7.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 17.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 20.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 8.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 6.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 87.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 21.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 75.3% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 10.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 55.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 17.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 40.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $77,039 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $156,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $865 | $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 | 78.1 yr ± 0.70 | 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 0.70 years of 78.1, 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