ZIP code
78231
in Shavano Park, TexasPopulation 9,744
64.37/ 100
Ranked #2,262 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 7.1%)
Ranked #68 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 3.7%)
Ranked #4 of 117 San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX ZIPs (top 3.5%)
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.
Dental provider access
2.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental offices located 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 ›Physician access
3.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ offices located 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 ›Dry extreme heat
90.6 days/year
in the top 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST75thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Pharmacy access
0.56 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of pharmacies located 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 ›Humid extreme heat
146.3 days/year
in the top 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST65thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›Grocery access
0.22 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets 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. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›Civic-institution access
0.78 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations 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 ›Tooth loss
4.7%
in the bottom 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
5.3%
in the bottom 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›Transit access
3.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 7.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The number of public-transit stops 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 ›The read
In its overall standing, Shavano Park, Texas (ZIP 78231) lands in the top 7.1% healthiest ZIPs nationally (2,262nd) and the top 3.7% of Texas (68th).
Taken together, the data gives a genuinely mixed reading: dental providers rests in the top 0.5% nationally, physicians registers in the top 2.6% nationally, and pharmacy resides in the top 4.1% nationally. Grocery settles in the top 6.1% nationally, civic is in the top 6.6% nationally, and modeled tooth loss sits in the bottom 1.6% nationally. Modeled independent living disability lands in the bottom 4.2% nationally, and transit lies in the top 7.7% nationally. On the other side, modeled extreme heat stands in the top 2.8% nationally, and humid heat rests in the top 5.7% nationally.
Against the wider neighborhood, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put simply, 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. On the overall standing, ZIP 78248, just across the boundary, ranks healthier.
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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 89%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 95%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 72%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 72%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 85%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 87%
8%
Disability
healthier than 92%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 81%
5%
Holding it back
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 11%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 81%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 97%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 95%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 94%
8%
Disability
healthier than 91%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 54%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 57%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 77%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 97%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 96%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 96%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 96%
8%
Disability
healthier than 89%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 77%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 64%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 38%
14%
“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
78213
Texasshares a border
Score 45.91
Closest healthier
78248
Texasshares a border
Score 65.27
Similar health profile
75075
Texas100% similar profile
Score 61.09
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 | 25.2% | 22.8–27.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 33.6% | 30.6–36.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.9% | 8.0–9.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.6% | 7.6–9.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.2% | 4.6–5.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.2% | 3.6–5.0 |
| Depression among adults | 21.3% | 18.7–24.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.1% | 9.8–12.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.9% | 32.7–39.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 27.7% | 23.9–31.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.7% | 2.4–2.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 4.7% | 3.8–5.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.9% | 9.2–12.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.6% | 74.7–80.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 76.6% | 73.8–79.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 90.0% | 88.5–91.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 70.9% | 67.6–74.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 69.4% | 67.0–72.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.7% | 72.3–82.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.3% | 14.0–18.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 7.6% | 6.3–9.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 20.3% | 17.4–23.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.1% | 31.8–38.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 14.1% | 12.2–16.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 13.0% | 11.5–14.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.8% | 9.4–12.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 10.2% | 8.8–11.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 24.6% | 21.7–27.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.4–6.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.6–6.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.3–12.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.5% | 2.2–2.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.6% | 3.2–4.0 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 8.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 0.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 65.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 1.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 28.8% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 66.2% | 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 | 11.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 46.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 20.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 41.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $109,183 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $401,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $1,393 | $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 | 79.3 yr ± 1.76 | 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 1.76 years of 79.3, 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