ZIP code
79707
in Midland, TexasPopulation 40,010
52.88/ 100
Ranked #12,259 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 38%)
Ranked #374 of 1,868 Texas ZIPs (top 20%)
Too few scored ZIPs in the Midland, TX metro area to rank within it.
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.
Arsenic in groundwater
49.3%
in the top 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Dry extreme heat
85.7 days/year
in the top 4.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST59thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
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 ›Nitrate in drinking water
2.7%
in the top 5.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›PFOS in drinking water
96.6%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOS, one of the most common “forever chemicals,” was detected in EPA testing.
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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 6.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›PFAS in drinking water
61.7%
in the top 7.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
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 ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 9.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST80thUS91stDefinition & 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 ›Binge drinking
19.2%
in the top 9.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Coronary heart disease
5.0%
in the bottom 9.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 79707, one of several in Midland, Texas ranks in the top 38% healthiest ZIPs nationally (12,259th) and the top 20% of Texas (374th), based on limited data; treat as directional.
A profile of give and take, with clear readings each way: distance to a community health center resides at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. On the other side, modeled arsenic stands in the top 0.8% nationally, and extreme heat sits in the top 4.1% nationally. Modeled tree cover resides at the national minimum, modeled nitrate stands in the top 5.3% nationally, and PFOS in drinking water sits in the top 5.9% nationally. Modeled disaster risk resides in the top 6.7% nationally, pfas stands in the top 7.3% nationally, and expected annual loss sits in the top 9.2% nationally. Modeled binge drinking resides in the top 9.8% nationally.
Against its neighbors, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For context, 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. PFOS in drinking water is a common one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. The closest ZIP that ranks healthier overall is ZIP 79705, 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 88%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 71%
16%
Disability
healthier than 78%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 77%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 54%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 20%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 38%
11%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 4%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 80%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 72%
16%
Disability
healthier than 81%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 72%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 60%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 56%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 57%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 11%
14%
Climate / Disaster RiskPartial
healthier than 14%
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
79703
Texasshares a border
Score 49.59
Closest healthier
79705
Texasshares a border
Score 53.79
Similar health profile
77362
Texas99% similar profile
Score 52.29
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 | 21.2% | 18.5–24.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.2% | 27.4–35.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.8% | 6.2–7.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.7% | 8.6–10.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.0% | 4.4–5.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–5.9 |
| Depression among adults | 22.4% | 19.0–25.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.1% | 8.7–11.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.4% | 29.3–37.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 33.9% | 26.6–41.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.7% | 2.4–2.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.2% | 8.3–12.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 14.4% | 12.7–16.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 72.9% | 69.8–75.8 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.2% | 69.1–77.0 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.5% | 83.7–87.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.1% | 58.1–67.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 60.3% | 56.8–63.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.8% | 68.4–82.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 19.2% | 16.0–22.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.9% | 10.3–13.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.6% | 19.8–27.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.7% | 32.3–45.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.9% | 15.7–20.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.8% | 14.9–18.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 11.9% | 10.5–13.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.9% | 12.4–15.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 29.1% | 25.2–33.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.9% | 5.2–6.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.1% | 6.3–7.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 11.7% | 10.2–13.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.1% | 2.9–3.4 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.1–4.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | TX median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 12.4% (3.5–26.4%) n=1,869 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 14.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 22.3% (8.2–41.5%) n=1,862 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 9.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 12.2% (2.5–30.0%) n=1,881 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 40.3% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 21.9% (9.0–51.4%) n=1,881 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 4.2% (0.0–9.4%) n=1,865 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 3.7% (0.0–10.8%) n=1,868 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 89.2% (75.0–97.3%) n=1,868 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 34.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 26.2% (8.8–40.3%) n=1,868 |
| Homeownership rate | 60.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 75.0% (46.4–92.3%) n=1,868 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 3.1% (0.0–9.0%) n=1,868 |
| Foreign-born population | 12.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 8.1% (0.1–26.4%) n=1,886 |
| Single-parent households | 41.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.5% (34.3–70.6%) n=1,861 |
| Population 65+ | 11.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 16.1% (8.6–30.1%) n=1,886 |
| Median age | 31.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 38.3 yr (30.9–52.3) n=1,866 |
| Median household income | $99,886 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $69,983 ($46,006–$112,413) n=1,737 |
| Median home value | $389,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $210,500 ($97,060–$429,760) n=1,693 |
| Median gross rent | $1,488 | $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 | 79.8 yr ± 0.62 | 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 0.62 years of 79.8, 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