ZIP code
90022
in Los Angeles, CaliforniaPopulation 60,343
40.90/ 100
Ranked #26,111 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 19%)
Ranked #1,479 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 14.0%)
Ranked #346 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (bottom 6.8%)
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
46.1%
in the bottom 0.9% 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 ›Uninsured (under 65)
25.1%
in the top 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
44.3%
in the top 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Crowded housing
23.7%
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
35.4%
in the top 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Vision disability
10.8%
in the top 3.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are blind or have serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
49.8 per million
in the top 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air toxics, in cases per million people exposed over a lifetime.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$1
in the top 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Walkability
250 intersections/sq mi
in the top 1.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
4.3%
in the top 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›The read
Judged by its overall standing, ZIP 90022, one of several in Los Angeles, California sits in the bottom 19% nationally (26,111th) and the bottom 14.0% of California (1,479th).
The profile carries real weight, and several readings make that plain: modeled colon screening stands in the bottom 0.9% nationally, uninsured resides in the top 2.2% nationally, and loneliness sits in the top 0.8% nationally. Crowded housing stands in the top 0.9% nationally, modeled fair or poor health resides in the top 2.5% nationally, and modeled vision disability sits in the top 3.4% nationally. Modeled air-toxics cancer risk stands in the top 1.1% nationally, and expected annual loss resides in the top 1.1% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise sits in the top 1.9% nationally. Better still, walkability stands in the top 1.3% nationally.
Placed beside its immediate neighbors, walkability runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put plainly, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. A healthier nearby ZIP overall is ZIP 90040, 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 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA metro area.
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 87%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 87%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 88%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 57%
8%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 8%
16%
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.2%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 1%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 27%
11%
Disability
healthier than 10%
7%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 61%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 71%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 75%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 50%
8%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 13%
16%
Environmental Hazard
in the bottom 0.6%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 5%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 12%
11%
Disability
healthier than 10%
7%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 54%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 55%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 26%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 10%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 2%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 5%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 10%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 23%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
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
3 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.
Above what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 80.2 ± 1.0 years. A median household income of $67,967 predicts 78.6 years — 1.6 years above.
Ranked #1,173 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 0.1 (bottom 1%); chronic-disease standing 86.6 — 87 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,658 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Highest-risk tenth
Air toxics and the years between the two ends of the risk scale
Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is 49.8 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 80.2 ± 1.0 years.
Ranked #190 of the 4,173 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by modeled air-toxics risk, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
90023
Californiashares a border
Score 36.74
Closest healthier
90040
Californiashares a border
Score 45.06
Similar health profile
90262
California99% similar profile
Score 41.02
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 | 18.1% | 16.7–19.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.1% | 27.1–31.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 4.0% | 3.6–4.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.1% | 8.2–10.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.6% | 5.1–6.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.4 |
| Depression among adults | 19.5% | 17.7–21.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.9% | 13.6–16.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.9% | 33.8–38.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 32.0% | 28.9–35.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.4% | 3.1–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.8% | 11.4–16.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 25.1% | 22.4–27.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 67.6% | 65.1–70.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 67.2% | 64.6–69.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 79.5% | 77.7–81.3 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 46.1% | 42.6–49.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 48.5% | 45.9–51.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 70.5% | 64.7–75.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.4% | 13.7–17.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.3% | 11.9–14.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 36.5% | 33.7–39.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.0% | 35.0–40.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 35.4% | 33.0–37.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.6% | 17.1–20.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 18.2% | 16.7–19.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 21.4% | 19.5–23.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 40.3% | 37.6–42.9 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.4% | 5.8–7.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.6% | 10.6–12.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 19.1% | 17.5–20.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.6% | 6.0–7.1 |
| Vision disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.9–11.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 35.2% | 32.6–38.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 36.2% | 33.5–39.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 30.9% | 28.1–33.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 29.2% | 26.8–31.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 16.5% | 15.0–18.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 44.3% | 41.5–47.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 12.2% | 10.9–13.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 19.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 42.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 10.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 11.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 88.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 42.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 33.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 23.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 38.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 35.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 12.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 34.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $67,967 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $629,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,447 | $1,021 ($677–$1,912) n=25,670 | $1,912 ($1,113–$2,923) n=1,461 |
Life expectancyNCHS / RWJF USALEEP · model-based
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Life expectancy at birth | 80.2 yr ± 0.49 | 78.9 yr (74.7–82.8) n=31,308 | 80.5 yr (76.7–83.8) n=1,665 |
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 0.49 years of 80.2, 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