ZIP code
79101
in Amarillo, TexasPopulation 2,526
39.17/ 100
Ranked #27,279 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 15.0%)
Ranked #1,526 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (bottom 18%)
Ranked #22 of 26 Amarillo, TX ZIPs (bottom 15%)
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.
Pharmacy access
3.5 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.04% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Outpatient-care access
3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics 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 ›Civic-institution access
5.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Child-care access
2.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›Mental-health provider access
0.87 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health clinics 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 ›Recreation access
3.5 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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 ›Uninsured (under 65)
23%
in the top 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST76thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
13.2%
in the top 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
10.0%
in the bottom 1.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST2ndUS1stDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Physician access
4.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›The read
ZIP 79101, one of several in Amarillo, Texas, by its composite score, sits in the bottom 15.0% nationally (27,279th) and the bottom 18% of Texas (1,526th).
The data opens on real and measurable burdens: modeled uninsured lies in the top 3.0% nationally, and hearing disability rests in the top 1.6% nationally. Homeownership resides in the bottom 1.4% nationally. More encouragingly, pharmacy is in the top 0.04% nationally, outpatient lands in the top 0.2% nationally, and civic stands in the top 0.2% nationally. Childcare registers in the top 0.3% nationally, mental-health providers settles in the top 0.3% nationally, and recreation sits in the top 0.4% nationally. Physicians lies in the top 1.4% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, pharmacy runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 79106, 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
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 63%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 80%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 49%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 58%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 53%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 9%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 10%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 37%
11%
Disability
healthier than 3%
7%
Lifting this score
Mental Health
healthier than 63%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
in the top 0.2%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 76%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 44%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 43%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 53%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 3%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 36%
13%
Disability
healthier than 3%
7%
Lifting this score
Mental Health
healthier than 86%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
in the top 0.00%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 93%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 50%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 57%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
in the bottom 0.00%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 29%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 36%
14%
Disability
in the bottom 0.00%
7%
“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.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 63.2; chronic-disease standing 8.9 (bottom 10%) — 54 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #2,159 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
79102
Texasshares a border
Score 39.13
Closest healthier
79106
Texasshares a border
Score 44.65
Similar health profile
86333
Arizona97% similar profile
Score 40.67
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 | 35.6% | 31.9–39.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 46.6% | 42.0–51.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 11.7% | 10.3–13.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.2% | 8.9–11.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 11.4% | 9.7–13.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 11.5% | 9.2–14.4 |
| Depression among adults | 21.6% | 18.2–25.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 18.0% | 15.5–20.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 42.7% | 37.9–47.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 39.1% | 30.8–47.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 6.3% | 5.2–7.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.7% | 11.1–16.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 23.0% | 20.2–26.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 82.5% | 80.0–84.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.5% | 74.9–81.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.2% | 84.4–87.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 57.5% | 51.6–63.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 47.0% | 43.2–50.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 68.0% | 58.9–76.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 12.4% | 10.1–14.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.6% | 13.4–18.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 38.1% | 31.6–44.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.8% | 30.0–44.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 30.9% | 26.5–36.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.0% | 15.0–19.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 18.6% | 15.9–21.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.2% | 15.8–21.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 46.5% | 40.9–52.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 13.2% | 11.3–15.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 13.6% | 11.1–16.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 26.0% | 21.6–30.7 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.8% | 5.7–8.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 9.7% | 8.2–11.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 22.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 34.5% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 17.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 21.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 37.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 72.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 46.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 10.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.1% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 4.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 45.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 31.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 48.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $47,759 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $167,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $946 | $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 | 73.3 yr ± 1.32 | 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 1.32 years of 73.3, 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