Skip to main content
ZipVitals

ZIP code

79403

in Lubbock, TexasPopulation 16,089

36.69/ 100

Ranked #28,675 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 10.6%)

Ranked #1,665 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (bottom 10.9%)

Ranked #34 of 36 Lubbock, TX ZIPs (bottom 5.6%)

Ranks are modeled estimates — ZIPs a few hundred places apart are effectively tied.

Robust across all 9 health domains

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)

26.5%

in the top 1.9% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST82nd
US98th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.

Full methodology ›

Vision disability

11.1%

in the top 3.1% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST92nd
US97th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.

Full methodology ›

Nitrate in drinking water

51.6%

in the top 0.8% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST96th
US99th
Definition & 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 ›

Natural-disaster risk

in the top 1.1% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST98th
US99th
Definition & 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 ›

Self-care disability

7.8%

in the top 3.3% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST95th
US97th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.

Full methodology ›

Fair or poor health

34%

in the top 3.4% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST92nd
US97th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.

Full methodology ›

Arsenic in groundwater

34.7%

in the top 2.3% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST95th
US98th
Definition & 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 ›

Diabetes

19.9%

in the top 3.9% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST94th
US96th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.

Full methodology ›

Independent-living disability

13.2%

in the top 6.1% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST95th
US94th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.

Full methodology ›

Mobility disability

23.4%

in the top 6.0% nationally

Lower is healthier

ST94th
US94th
Definition & source ›

The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.

Full methodology ›

The read

In overall standing, ZIP 79403, one of several in Lubbock, Texas comes out in the bottom 10.6% nationally (28,675th) and the bottom 10.9% of Texas (1,665th).

continue reading

The data is direct about where this area carries real strain: modeled uninsured settles in the top 1.9% nationally, vision disability registers in the top 3.1% nationally, and nitrate stands in the top 0.8% nationally. Modeled disaster risk lands in the top 1.1% nationally, self-care disability is in the top 3.3% nationally, and fair or poor health resides in the top 3.4% nationally. Modeled arsenic rests in the top 2.3% nationally, and diabetes lies in the top 3.9% nationally. Modeled independent living disability sits in the top 6.1% nationally, and mobility disability settles in the top 6.0% nationally.

Relative to the ZIPs around it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain terms, nitrate is a groundwater compound from fertilizer, manure, and sewage, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. 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. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 79311, 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 Lubbock, TX metro area.

Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.

Compare within

Lifting this score

Healthcare Access

healthier than 87%

5%

About typical

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 40%

14%

Mental Health

healthier than 42%

8%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 19%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 29%

16%

Preventive Care

healthier than 7%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 8%

11%

Disability

healthier than 5%

7%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 26%

5%

Lifting this score

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 97%

5%

Healthcare Access

healthier than 87%

5%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

healthier than 8%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 21%

16%

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 25%

14%

Preventive Care

healthier than 27%

13%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 10%

11%

Mental Health

healthier than 38%

8%

Disability

healthier than 6%

7%

Lifting this score

Healthcare Access

healthier than 69%

5%

About typical

Preventive Care

healthier than 54%

13%

Mental Health

healthier than 54%

8%

Climate / Disaster Risk

healthier than 54%

5%

Holding it back

Chronic Disease Burden

in the bottom 0.00%

21%

Social Need / SDOH

healthier than 23%

16%

Environmental Hazard

healthier than 23%

14%

Risk Behavior

healthier than 15%

11%

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

2 of our published findings list 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.

  • Below what income predicts

    The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes

    Estimated life expectancy is 74.9 ± 1.1 years. A median household income of $47,907 predicts 77.2 years — 2.3 years below.

    Ranked #3,139 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.

  • Below its nearby ZIPs

    The ZIP codes that outlive their neighbors

    Estimated life expectancy is 74.9 ± 1.1 years. The 45 nearest ZIP codes with estimates average 77.7 years — 2.8 years below them.

    Ranked #2,218 of the 3,687 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above the nearby-ZIP average, highest first.

Nearby & similar ZIPs

Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.

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
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Arthritis among adults27.7%24.6–30.9
High blood pressure among adults42.2%38.1–46.2
Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults6.2%5.6–6.8
Current asthma among adults10.8%9.6–12.1
Coronary heart disease among adults8.5%7.7–9.3
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults9.6%8.7–10.6
Depression among adults21.0%17.9–24.4
Diagnosed diabetes among adults19.9%17.7–22.3
High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened39.3%35.1–43.6
Obesity among adults43.9%36.5–51.5
Stroke among adults5.4%5.0–5.8
All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years24.3%20.8–28.1
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years26.5%23.7–29.2
Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure78.6%76.0–81.0
Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults75.1%71.3–78.6
Cholesterol screening among adults83.2%81.3–85.1
Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years59.1%54.6–63.5
Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults43.4%40.2–46.4
Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years72.9%66.3–78.7
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Binge drinking among adults13.9%11.4–16.6
Current cigarette smoking among adults19.0%16.7–21.4
No leisure-time physical activity among adults41.2%36.2–46.1
Short sleep duration among adults40.3%36.0–44.7
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults34.0%30.6–37.2
Frequent mental distress among adults19.2%17.1–21.3
Frequent physical distress among adults18.6%16.6–20.6
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
MeasureCrude prevalence95% CI
Cognitive disability among adults19.9%17.8–21.9
Any disability among adults42.1%37.6–46.5
Hearing disability among adults8.4%7.5–9.3
Independent living disability among adults13.2%11.9–14.5
Mobility disability among adults23.4%21.1–25.8
Self-care disability among adults7.8%7.1–8.4
Vision disability among adults11.1%10.2–12.0
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)TX median (p10–p90)
Poverty rate24.5%10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,36412.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869
Uninsured 18–6428.3%9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,28622.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862
No HS diploma (25+)21.7%7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,50512.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881
Bachelor's or higher (25+)12.1%23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,50521.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881
Unemployment rate (16+)9.3%3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,2744.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865
Households without a vehicle7.4%3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,3223.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868
Broadband subscription83.8%89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,32289.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868
Housing cost burden (≥30% income)32.1%23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,32226.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868
Homeownership rate60.3%78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,32275.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868
Crowded housing (>1 per room)5.2%1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,3223.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868
Foreign-born population4.9%2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,5538.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886
Single-parent households41.7%53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,08748.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861
Population 65+19.1%19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,55316.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886
Median age38.4 yr42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,29238.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866
Median household income$47,907$72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318$69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737
Median home value$84,100$222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049$210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693
Median gross rent$1,060$1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670$1,154 ($764–$1,815) n=1,508
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
MeasureValueUS median (p10–p90)TX median (p10–p90)
Life expectancy at birth74.9 yr ± 0.5578.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,30878.2 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 0.55 years of 74.9, and it’s very unlikely to be off by more than twice that.

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