ZIP code
78055
in Medina, TexasPopulation 1,753
46.58/ 100
Ranked #20,663 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 36%)
Ranked #802 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 43%)
Ranked #74 of 117 San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX ZIPs (bottom 37%)
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.
Elder-services access
0.64 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities inside this ZIP’s boundary, per 1,000 residents.
Counted from establishments located inside this ZIP’s boundary, so one just across the line is not counted. Where a ZIP has too few residents for the density to be reliable, no value is published rather than an unreliable one.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS3rdDefinition & 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 ›High cholesterol
46.5%
in the top 2.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
10.9%
in the top 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
7.9%
in the bottom 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS5thDefinition & 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 ›Hearing disability
11.6%
in the top 6.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
1.2%
in the bottom 6.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS6thDefinition & 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 ›Dry extreme heat
67.7 days/year
in the top 6.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST39thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
8.4%
in the bottom 7.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST10thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
47.2%
in the top 7.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›The read
Medina, Texas (ZIP 78055), on the composite measure, lands in the bottom 36% nationally (20,663rd) and the top 43% of Texas (802nd).
What the numbers press hardest on defines much of the story here: modeled high cholesterol settles in the top 2.1% nationally, coronary heart disease stands in the top 4.7% nationally, and hearing disability is in the top 6.0% nationally. Modeled extreme heat rests in the top 6.2% nationally, and high blood pressure sits in the top 7.3% nationally. On the encouraging side, elder services registers in the top 1.7% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden lands in the bottom 2.8% nationally. Modeled pfas resides in the bottom 4.8% nationally, and arsenic lies in the bottom 6.1% nationally. Housing-cost burden settles in the bottom 7.7% nationally.
Set against the neighboring ZIPs, elder services runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In everyday language, industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. 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. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 78010, 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
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 79%
16%
Environmental Hazard
in the top 0.7%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 65%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 67%
8%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 52%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 10%
21%
Disability
healthier than 21%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 18%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 9%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 81%
16%
Environmental Hazard
in the top 0.3%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 95%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 72%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 73%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 89%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 3%
21%
Disability
healthier than 25%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 8%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Environmental Hazard
in the top 1.0%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 93%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 73%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 64%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
in the top 1.0%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 3%
21%
Disability
healthier than 22%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 2%
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 99.3 (top 1%); chronic-disease standing 9.7 (bottom 10%) — 90 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #129 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
78003
Texasshares a border
Score 45.73
Closest healthier
78010
Texasshares a border
Score 47.24
Similar health profile
30412
Georgia95% similar profile
Score 45.68
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 | 37.5% | 33.5–41.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 47.2% | 42.5–51.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 13.0% | 11.6–14.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.3% | 9.1–11.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 10.9% | 9.6–12.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.1% | 9.3–13.3 |
| Depression among adults | 22.7% | 19.4–26.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 17.4% | 15.1–19.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 46.5% | 41.7–51.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.4% | 27.9–43.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 5.4% | 4.8–6.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 12.0% | 9.7–14.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 13.1% | 10.8–15.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 84.5% | 82.0–86.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 80.8% | 77.6–83.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.2% | 88.7–91.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.8% | 63.6–73.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 57.3% | 53.4–61.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.0% | 65.6–81.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.5% | 11.1–16.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 14.9% | 12.1–17.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 31.6% | 26.3–37.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.2% | 29.5–43.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 24.4% | 20.7–28.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.2% | 13.3–17.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.0% | 14.7–19.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.1% | 12.1–16.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 39.3% | 34.0–44.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.6% | 10.2–13.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.7% | 8.3–11.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 21.8% | 18.6–25.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.2% | 4.4–6.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.6–7.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 21.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 29.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 25.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.3% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 8.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 80.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 8.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 61.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 50.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 65.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $85,345 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $266,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $929 | $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 | 79.1 yr ± 1.16 | 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 1.16 years of 79.1, 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