ZIP code
79347
in Muleshoe, TexasPopulation 7,176
44.28/ 100
Ranked #23,144 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 28%)
Ranked #1,058 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)
29.5%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Fiber broadband
99.4%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes where fiber-optic internet service is available.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
26.6%
in the top 4.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS96thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›Nitrate in drinking water
4.8%
in the top 4.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of this area’s domestic-well groundwater at or above the federal nitrate limit of 10 milligrams per liter.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.28 per 1,000 residents
in the top 5.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 6.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
57.3%
in the bottom 7.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST26thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Dry extreme heat
49.1 days/year
in the top 9.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST18thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Radon
1.2 pCi/L
in the bottom 31% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS31stDefinition & source ›
The modeled typical indoor radon level for this area, in picocuries per liter — the EPA recommends fixing a home at 4 pCi/L or above.
Modeled from indoor-radon measurements. In Alaska and Hawaii, where those measurements are not published, a US Geological Survey geologic radon-potential category stands in — a coarser input, disclosed rather than hidden.
Full methodology ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, Muleshoe, Texas (ZIP 79347) ranks in the bottom 28% nationally (23,144th) and the bottom 43% of Texas (1,058th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
Where this area bears down hardest, the measures speak first: modeled uninsured settles in the top 1.2% nationally, and disaster risk lies in the top 1.9% nationally. Modeled arsenic resides in the top 4.0% nationally, and nitrate lands in the top 4.2% nationally. Modeled colon screening registers in the bottom 7.9% nationally, and fair or poor health sits in the top 10.6% nationally. On the encouraging side, fiber broadband rests in the top 3.7% nationally, elder services is in the top 5.0% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden stands in the bottom 6.2% nationally. Unemployment settles at the national minimum, shared with about 15% of ZIPs.
In plainer terms, disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Nitrate is a groundwater compound from fertilizer, manure, and sewage, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 79027, 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
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 74%
14%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 60%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 56%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 50%
8%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 5%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 18%
11%
Disability
healthier than 20%
7%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 25%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 21%
5%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 96%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 47%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 55%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 57%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 51%
8%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 18%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 27%
11%
Disability
healthier than 24%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 22%
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
79027
Texasshares a border
Score 50.31
Closest healthier
79035
Texasshares a border
Score 49.18
Similar health profile
78943
Texas97% similar profile
Score 44.53
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 | 23.9% | 22.5–25.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 35.5% | 33.4–37.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.4% | 6.0–6.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.5% | 8.8–10.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.2% | 6.7–7.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.5% | 6.8–8.2 |
| Depression among adults | 21.5% | 19.8–23.3 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 15.1% | 14.1–16.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.3% | 35.2–39.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 38.8% | 35.0–42.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.8% | 3.6–4.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 17.9% | 14.8–21.1 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 29.5% | 26.2–33.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.9% | 73.3–76.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 71.9% | 69.7–73.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 82.2% | 80.6–83.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 57.3% | 52.2–62.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 47.7% | 44.2–51.3 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.0% | 62.9–78.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.3% | 14.9–17.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 15.1% | 13.7–16.6 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 35.9% | 32.9–38.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.1% | 31.5–45.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 28.9% | 26.5–31.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.9% | 16.6–19.1 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 16.4% | 15.2–17.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 18.4% | 16.8–20.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 38.2% | 35.5–41.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.3% | 7.7–8.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.4% | 9.5–11.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 18.2% | 16.8–19.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.4% | 5.0–5.8 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.4% | 7.8–9.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.7% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 35.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 27.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 16.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 9.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 84.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 23.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 78.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 18.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 44.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 18.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 33.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $66,792 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $105,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $932 | $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 | 80.4 yr ± 1.00 | 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 1.00 years of 80.4, 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