ZIP code
79091
in Umbarger, TexasPopulation 0
53.87/ 100
Ranked #10,866 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 34%)
Ranked #332 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 18%)
Ranked #7 of 26 Amarillo, TX ZIPs (top 27%)
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.
Transportation noise
60.8%
in the top 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
6.8%
in the top 0.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›Fiber broadband
100%
at the national maximum
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Walkability
0.94 intersections/sq mi
in the bottom 2.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Distance to a nursing home
14.3 mi
in the top 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare- or Medicaid-certified nursing home.
Full methodology ›Binge drinking
20%
in the top 6.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report binge drinking — five or more drinks on one occasion for men, four or more for women.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
5.5%
in the bottom 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Tree cover
0.00%
in the bottom 9.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST12thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Mammography
77.5%
in the top 30% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST92ndUS70thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›The read
Umbarger, Texas (ZIP 79091), by its overall standing, sits in the top 34% healthiest ZIPs nationally (10,866th) and the top 18% of Texas (332nd), based on limited data; treat as directional.
The measures fall on both sides of the ledger for this area: fiber broadband registers at the national maximum, and modeled tooth loss stands in the bottom 3.3% nationally. Set against that, modeled transportation noise lands in the top 0.3% nationally, modeled loud transportation noise is in the top 0.7% nationally, and walkability resides in the bottom 2.4% nationally. Distance to a nursing home rests in the top 5.9% nationally, and modeled binge drinking lies in the top 6.2% nationally. Modeled tree cover sits in the bottom 9.9% nationally, and extreme heat settles in the top 10.1% nationally. Distance to a community health center registers in the top 13.9% nationally.
Held up against its neighbors, transportation noise runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. The nearest ZIP ranking healthier overall is ZIP 79015, 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 Amarillo, 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 74%
21%
Social Need / SDOHPartial
healthier than 73%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 61%
8%
Disability
healthier than 74%
7%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 41%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 51%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 22%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 31%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 8%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 64%
21%
Social Need / SDOHPartial
healthier than 74%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 85%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 70%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 66%
8%
Disability
healthier than 79%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 98%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 7%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 69%
21%
Social Need / SDOHPartial
healthier than 75%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 85%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 70%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 88%
8%
Disability
healthier than 85%
7%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.00%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 27%
5%
Healthcare Access
in the bottom 0.00%
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
79015
Texasshares a border
Score 54.49
Closest healthier
79119
Texasabout 4.1 mi away
Score 60.90
Similar health profile
67734
Kansas96% similar profile
Score 55.67
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 | 25.3% | 22.1–28.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 35.9% | 31.9–40.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.8% | 7.8–9.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.3% | 8.2–10.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.9% | 5.8–8.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.3% | 4.9–7.9 |
| Depression among adults | 22.6% | 19.3–26.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.8% | 10.0–13.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.5% | 33.2–41.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 34.7% | 27.4–42.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 2.7–4.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 5.5% | 4.3–6.9 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.7% | 7.6–14.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.9% | 72.7–79.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 74.5% | 70.3–78.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.9% | 83.7–89.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.8% | 62.1–71.5 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 61.4% | 57.8–65.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.5% | 70.3–84.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 20.0% | 16.6–23.7 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.5% | 9.3–16.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 20.9% | 16.4–26.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.5% | 29.4–42.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.6% | 14.4–21.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.9% | 13.6–18.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 12.4% | 10.5–14.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.9% | 10.6–15.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 29.1% | 24.3–34.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.8% | 6.7–9.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.5% | 5.4–7.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.4% | 10.1–15.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.3% | 2.7–4.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.4–4.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | — | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | — | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | — | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | — | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | — | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | — | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | — | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | — | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | — | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | — | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | — | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | — | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | — | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | — | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | — | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | — | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | — | $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 | 79.6 yr ± 1.21 | 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 1.21 years of 79.6, 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