ZIP code
78566
in Los Fresnos, TexasPopulation 25,110
45.78/ 100
Ranked #21,567 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 33%)
Ranked #879 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 47%)
Ranked #8 of 16 Brownsville-Harlingen, TX ZIPs (top 50%)
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)
35.4%
in the top 0.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
49.8%
in the bottom 1.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST6thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
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
182.3 days/year
in the top 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS98thDefinition & 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
11.6%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Crowded housing
9.3%
in the top 5.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
30.1%
in the top 8.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Poverty rate
29.9%
in the top 6.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
33.9%
in the top 8.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS92ndDefinition & 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
272 units
in the top 9.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST84thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
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
Los Fresnos, Texas (ZIP 78566), by its overall standing, sits in the bottom 33% nationally (21,567th) and the top 47% of Texas (879th).
The data points to real strain across a number of measures here: modeled uninsured registers in the top 0.5% nationally, colon screening stands in the bottom 1.9% nationally, and vision disability lands in the top 3.7% nationally. Modeled humid heat is in the top 1.6% nationally, outer-floodplain exposure resides in the top 3.3% nationally, and crowded housing rests in the top 5.2% nationally. Modeled fair or poor health lies in the top 8.2% nationally, and poverty sits in the top 6.9% nationally. Floodplain exposure settles in the top 8.4% nationally. On the brighter side, subsidized affordable housing registers in the top 9.1% nationally.
Held up against its neighbors, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. Outer-floodplain exposure is land with a lower but real 1-in-500 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "500-year floodplain". Floodplain exposure is land with about a 1-in-100 chance of flooding each year, nicknamed the "100-year floodplain". The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 78526, 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 Brownsville-Harlingen, 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 79%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 96%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 74%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 66%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 36%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 3%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 18%
11%
Disability
healthier than 16%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 5%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 70%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 95%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 81%
8%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 57%
5%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 28%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 12%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 27%
11%
Disability
healthier than 19%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 20%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 86%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 79%
14%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 57%
16%
Disability
healthier than 50%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 50%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 50%
5%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 21%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 36%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 21%
8%
“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
78526
Texasshares a border
Score 51.78
Closest healthier
78575
Texasshares a border
Score 57.40
Similar health profile
78840
Texas99% similar profile
Score 45.08
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 | 18.2% | 16.3–20.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.7% | 28.9–34.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 4.3% | 3.9–4.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.7% | 7.7–9.8 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.2% | 5.5–6.8 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.6% | 5.0–6.3 |
| Depression among adults | 19.1% | 16.7–21.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 17.0% | 15.2–18.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 34.9% | 31.8–38.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 40.2% | 35.6–45.1 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.4% | 3.2–3.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 15.7% | 13.1–18.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 35.4% | 32.0–38.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.4% | 70.5–76.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 70.3% | 66.8–73.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 81.8% | 79.6–83.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 49.8% | 45.4–54.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 48.3% | 45.1–51.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 73.1% | 66.6–78.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.6% | 14.1–19.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.1% | 11.5–15.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 35.7% | 31.9–39.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.8% | 35.4–44.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 30.1% | 27.2–33.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.9% | 15.1–18.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.7% | 14.0–17.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.4% | 16.4–20.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 35.3% | 31.8–38.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.1% | 6.3–7.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.7% | 9.6–11.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.2% | 15.4–19.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.1% | 5.5–6.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 10.6% | 9.7–11.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 29.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 40.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 28.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 21.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 91.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 25.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 75.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 9.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 23.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 44.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 10.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 33.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $60,187 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $154,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $891 | $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 | 78.7 yr ± 0.74 | 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 0.74 years of 78.7, 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