ZIP code
79029
in Dumas, TexasPopulation 15,411
44.13/ 100
Ranked #23,293 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 27%)
Ranked #1,073 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (bottom 43%)
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)
27.5%
in the top 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Distance to a community health center
31.2 mi
in the top 3.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest federally funded community health center, which serves patients regardless of ability to pay.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
55%
in the bottom 4.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST18thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS96thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
0.00%
at the national minimum
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 5.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS95thDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
64 µg/L
in the top 8.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
Measured from EPA records for the public water systems that serve this ZIP. Households on private wells — roughly 30% of the US population — are not covered by this measure, and this figure says nothing about their water.
Full methodology ›Dry extreme heat
49.4 days/year
in the top 9.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST19thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›The read
Dumas, Texas (ZIP 79029) ranks in the bottom 27% nationally (23,293rd) and the bottom 43% of Texas (1,073rd), based on limited data; treat as directional.
Several signals sit on each side of the ledger here: distance to an emergency room sits at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Distance to a nursing home resides at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Working the other way, modeled uninsured stands in the top 1.6% nationally, distance to a community health center sits in the top 3.8% nationally, and modeled colon screening resides in the bottom 4.9% nationally. Modeled expected annual loss stands in the top 4.2% nationally, tree cover sits at the national minimum, and disaster risk resides in the top 5.2% nationally. Lithium in drinking water stands in the top 8.0% nationally, and modeled extreme heat sits in the top 9.6% nationally.
Against its neighbors, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 79018, 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.
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 72%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 63%
14%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 46%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 44%
8%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 4%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 18%
11%
Disability
healthier than 28%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 23%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 4%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 61%
21%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 95%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 41%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 43%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 42%
8%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 14%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 29%
11%
Disability
healthier than 33%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
79013
Texasshares a border
Score 28.01
Closest healthier
79018
Texasshares a border
Score 48.37
Similar health profile
79070
Texas97% similar profile
Score 43.66
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 | 22.2% | 20.8–23.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 33.5% | 31.6–35.3 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.8% | 5.5–6.1 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.6% | 8.9–10.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.2% | 5.9–6.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.7% | 6.2–7.2 |
| Depression among adults | 21.8% | 20.1–23.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 13.9% | 13.0–14.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.5% | 33.5–37.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 38.0% | 34.4–41.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.4% | 3.2–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 17.5% | 14.5–20.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 27.5% | 25.2–30.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.3% | 71.7–74.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 71.6% | 69.4–73.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 81.8% | 80.4–83.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 55.0% | 49.4–60.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 47.6% | 43.8–51.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.3% | 61.3–78.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.8% | 15.3–18.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 14.8% | 13.6–16.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 34.2% | 31.7–36.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.5% | 31.2–46.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 27.2% | 25.4–29.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.4% | 17.2–19.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.5% | 14.5–16.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.2% | 16.9–19.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 36.3% | 34.0–38.7 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.2% | 6.8–7.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.9% | 9.2–10.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 16.5% | 15.3–17.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.6–5.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 7.8% | 7.3–8.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 19.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 21.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 25.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 12.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 87.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 29.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 63.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 24.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 37.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 12.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 30.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $64,652 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $161,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $1,013 | $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 | 77.9 yr ± 0.72 | 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 0.72 years of 77.9, 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