ZIP code
87528
in Dulce, New MexicoPopulation 3,756
30.79/ 100
Ranked #30,590 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 4.7%)
Ranked #302 of 337 New Mexico ZIPs (bottom 10.4%)
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.
Colon-cancer screening
44%
in the bottom 0.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST4thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
32.6%
in the top 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Mammography
62.2%
in the bottom 1.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST12thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Vision disability
10.6%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST81stUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
14.4%
in the top 3.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility
32.2 mi
in the top 1.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST81stUS98thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest facility that handles enough hazardous chemicals to require an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases.
Full methodology ›Lack of transportation
20.9%
in the top 1.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who lacked reliable transportation in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
21.6%
in the top 1.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
22.4%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Mental-health provider access
0.27 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›The read
By the composite health measure, Dulce, New Mexico (ZIP 87528) ranks in the bottom 4.7% nationally (30,590th) and the bottom 10.4% of New Mexico (302nd).
Where the load on this area runs deepest, the data leads: modeled colon screening registers in the bottom 0.6% nationally, and tooth loss rests in the top 1.9% nationally. Modeled mammography stands in the bottom 1.2% nationally, and vision disability lies in the top 3.7% nationally. Modeled independent living disability lands in the top 3.5% nationally, transportation sits in the top 1.8% nationally, and utility shutoff is in the top 1.8% nationally. Modeled cognitive disability settles in the top 3.3% nationally. More encouragingly, distance to a hazardous-chemical facility resides in the top 1.7% nationally, and mental-health providers registers in the top 2.4% nationally.
Read against the ZIPs closest to it, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To spell things out, distance to a hazardous-chemical facility is a plant handling large amounts of hazardous chemicals that must file an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases. Close by, ZIP 81128, just across the boundary, ranks healthier overall.
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
in the top 0.8%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 98%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 28%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 1%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 1%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 7%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 5%
8%
Disability
healthier than 5%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 20%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 83%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 81%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 32%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 11%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 11%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 10%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 7%
8%
Disability
healthier than 20%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 35%
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 ›
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 99.2 (top 1%); chronic-disease standing 27.6 — 72 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #974 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
81128
Coloradoshares a border
Score 55.94
Closest healthier
81147
Coloradoshares a border
Score 57.62
Similar health profile
88340
New Mexico99% similar profile
Score 29.00
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 | 26.4% | 23.0–29.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.6% | 30.4–39.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.4% | 4.8–6.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 14.1% | 12.3–16.1 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.4% | 6.5–8.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.8% | 7.5–10.1 |
| Depression among adults | 26.1% | 21.9–30.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 16.1% | 13.9–18.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 29.9% | 25.9–34.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 43.4% | 35.8–51.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.7% | 4.2–5.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 32.6% | 27.7–38.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.9% | 10.7–15.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 69.0% | 65.2–72.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 67.2% | 62.4–71.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 77.5% | 74.5–80.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 44.0% | 38.8–49.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 46.0% | 42.2–50.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 62.2% | 53.6–71.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.8% | 11.1–17.0 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 26.2% | 22.3–30.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 29.8% | 24.7–35.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 41.6% | 35.4–48.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 31.5% | 27.5–35.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 23.3% | 20.5–26.4 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 20.0% | 17.5–22.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 22.4% | 19.5–25.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 44.7% | 39.2–50.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 10.0% | 8.7–11.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 14.4% | 12.5–16.3 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 20.4% | 17.7–23.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.2% | 5.5–7.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 10.6% | 9.4–11.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 32.2% | 27.7–36.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 36.7% | 31.8–41.6 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 32.7% | 28.2–37.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 26.9% | 23.1–30.6 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 20.9% | 18.4–23.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 38.8% | 33.4–44.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 21.6% | 18.8–24.4 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NM median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 20.8% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 15.0% (0.0–39.0%) n=347 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 11.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 12.5% (0.0–35.5%) n=339 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.2% (0.0–28.5%) n=350 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 12.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 19.3% (0.0–51.7%) n=350 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 10.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 3.8% (0.0–15.2%) n=339 |
| Households without a vehicle | 6.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 2.3% (0.0–12.4%) n=347 |
| Broadband subscription | 74.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 83.1% (53.2–100.0%) n=347 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 12.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 18.6% (0.0–41.4%) n=347 |
| Homeownership rate | 64.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 83.2% (59.9–100.0%) n=347 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 2.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 0.4% (0.0–11.2%) n=347 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 1.9% (0.0–15.7%) n=352 |
| Single-parent households | 31.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 55.0% (28.8–100.0%) n=339 |
| Population 65+ | 15.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 22.8% (7.9–55.9%) n=352 |
| Median age | 37.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 45.0 yr (31.2–67.3) n=339 |
| Median household income | $41,679 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $55,329 ($33,023–$90,174) n=265 |
| Median home value | $56,100 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $185,100 ($77,100–$382,920) n=255 |
| Median gross rent | $472 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $917 ($549–$1,408) n=173 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | NM median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 79.8 yr ± 1.29 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 79.5 yr (76.1–83.2) n=357 |
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 1.29 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