ZIP code
78011
in Charlotte, TexasPopulation 1,757
38.86/ 100
Ranked #27,500 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 14.3%)
Ranked #1,553 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (bottom 17%)
Ranked #107 of 117 San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX ZIPs (bottom 8.6%)
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)
32.4%
in the top 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Dry extreme heat
111.8 days/year
in the top 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
51.9%
in the bottom 2.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST9thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Vision disability
10.5%
in the top 3.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
32.9%
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Humid extreme heat
157.5 days/year
in the top 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Crowded housing
12.2%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Fatal road crashes
51.2 per 100,000 residents per year
in the top 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS96thDefinition & source ›
The annual rate of fatal road crashes per 100,000 residents, pooled over a ten-year window.
A rate per resident population. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the rate to be reliable — about 30% of US ZIPs — no value is published rather than an unstable one; those ZIPs are absent from this comparison, not counted as crash-free.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
18.7%
in the top 6.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Home broadband subscription
69.1%
in the bottom 5.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST5thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›The read
Charlotte, Texas (ZIP 78011) ranks in the bottom 14.3% nationally (27,500th) and the bottom 17% of Texas (1,553rd).
Several readings make the pressure on this area plain: modeled uninsured lies in the top 0.8% nationally, and extreme heat is in the top 1.0% nationally. Modeled colon screening registers in the bottom 2.8% nationally, and vision disability lies in the top 3.9% nationally. Modeled fair or poor health is in the top 4.4% nationally, modeled humid heat registers in the top 3.0% nationally, and crowded housing lies in the top 3.3% nationally. Fatal road crashes is in the top 3.6% nationally, modeled diabetes registers in the top 6.3% nationally, and home broadband subscription lies in the bottom 5.7% nationally.
For context, extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. Humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 78005, 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. Compare it against the US, this state and the San Antonio-New Braunfels, 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 98%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 61%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 38%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 12%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 4%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 12%
11%
Disability
healthier than 9%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 7%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 25%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 98%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 66%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 24%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 5%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 16%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 18%
11%
Disability
healthier than 10%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 33%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 26%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 95%
14%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 55%
8%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 13%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 2%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 22%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 22%
11%
Disability
healthier than 12%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 35%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 11%
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.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 98.0 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 37.9 — 60 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #1,719 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
78005
Texasshares a border
Score 41.00
Closest healthier
78026
Texasshares a border
Score 42.05
Similar health profile
78375
Texas99% similar profile
Score 35.62
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 | 26.6% | 23.2–29.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 40.0% | 35.5–44.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.9% | 5.4–6.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.4% | 8.2–10.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.8% | 6.8–8.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.5% | 6.5–8.6 |
| Depression among adults | 20.5% | 17.2–24.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 18.7% | 16.2–21.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.9% | 35.4–44.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 43.9% | 35.5–52.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.2% | 3.8–4.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 21.9% | 18.1–25.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 32.4% | 27.0–38.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.8% | 73.9–79.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.7% | 69.7–77.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 82.9% | 80.5–85.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 51.9% | 46.3–57.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 44.2% | 40.6–48.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.5% | 62.0–78.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.5% | 12.7–18.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.2% | 12.7–17.9 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 40.7% | 34.6–46.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.7% | 31.9–45.9 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 32.9% | 28.3–37.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.4% | 15.1–19.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.8% | 15.4–20.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 19.0% | 16.3–21.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 40.7% | 35.4–46.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.9% | 7.7–10.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.2% | 9.6–12.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 21.4% | 18.4–24.3 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.5–7.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 10.5% | 9.1–11.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 30.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 44.2% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 27.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 14.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 9.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 69.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 32.2% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 91.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 12.2% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 13.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 52.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 22.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 37.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $29,664 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $118,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | — | $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 | 82.4 yr ± 2.46 | 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 2.46 years of 82.4, 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