ZIP code
78543
in Elsa, TexasPopulation 8,400
41.77/ 100
Ranked #25,417 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 21%)
Ranked #1,319 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (bottom 29%)
Ranked #7 of 27 McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX ZIPs (top 26%)
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)
34.4%
in the top 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Vision disability
10.6%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Humid extreme heat
183.9 days/year
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Dry extreme heat
98 days/year
in the top 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS98thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
53.5%
in the bottom 3.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST13thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Fair or poor health
31.7%
in the top 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Pharmacy access
0.53 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.5% 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 ›Grocery access
0.27 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Diabetes
18.1%
in the top 7.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, Elsa, Texas (ZIP 78543) ranks in the bottom 21% nationally (25,417th) and the bottom 29% of Texas (1,319th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
Where this area bears down hardest, the measures speak first: modeled uninsured rests in the top 0.6% nationally, and vision disability is in the top 3.7% nationally. Modeled humid heat stands in the top 1.5% nationally, and extreme heat settles in the top 1.6% nationally. Modeled colon screening lies in the bottom 3.8% nationally, fair or poor health resides in the top 5.7% nationally, and diabetes lands in the top 7.8% nationally. On the encouraging side, elder services registers in the top 3.2% nationally, pharmacy sits in the top 4.5% nationally, and grocery rests in the top 4.5% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 78539, about 6.8 miles away.
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 70%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 71%
8%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 57%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 29%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 4%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 22%
11%
Disability
healthier than 14%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the bottom 0.01%
5%
Lifting this score
Mental Health
healthier than 77%
8%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 59%
21%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 20%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 38%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 17%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 34%
11%
Disability
healthier than 16%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
in the bottom 0.04%
5%
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 ›
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.
Below its nearby ZIPs
The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors
Estimated life expectancy is 76.7 ± 2.1 years. The 47 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 79.9 years — 3.3 years below them.
Ranked #2,568 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
78538
Texasshares a border
Score 31.45
Closest healthier
78539
Texasabout 6.8 mi away
Score 49.98
Similar health profile
78119
Texas98% similar profile
Score 40.58
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 | 21.2% | 19.1–23.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.2% | 31.4–37.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 4.7% | 4.3–5.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.5% | 7.6–9.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.6% | 5.9–7.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.4% | 4.8–6.1 |
| Depression among adults | 19.3% | 16.9–21.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 18.1% | 16.3–20.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.4% | 33.4–39.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 43.8% | 39.4–48.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 14.7% | 12.3–17.5 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 34.4% | 30.4–38.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.1% | 73.6–78.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.3% | 70.2–76.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 82.7% | 80.6–84.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 53.5% | 49.2–57.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 46.2% | 42.9–49.4 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.7% | 63.9–76.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.4% | 14.1–18.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.7% | 10.2–13.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 36.4% | 32.6–40.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.5% | 35.2–43.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 31.7% | 28.7–35.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.1% | 15.3–19.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.1% | 14.5–17.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.0% | 16.0–20.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 38.0% | 34.5–41.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.9% | 7.1–8.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.5% | 9.3–11.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 19.2% | 17.2–21.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.2% | 5.6–6.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 10.6% | 9.7–11.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 27.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 33.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 21.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 6.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 8.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 87.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 26.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 74.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 5.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 14.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 39.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 13.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 33.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $44,527 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $87,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $844 | $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 | 76.7 yr ± 1.08 | 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 1.08 years of 76.7, 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