ZIP code
91351
in Canyon Country, CaliforniaPopulation 33,155
57.12/ 100
Ranked #7,165 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 22%)
Ranked #667 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 39%)
Ranked #205 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (bottom 45%)
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.
Slow internet speeds
3.6%
in the top 3.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of homes whose fastest available download speed is under 10 Mbps.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
40.3%
in the top 3.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST85thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
3.0%
in the top 3.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST76thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Lead in tap water
0 ppb
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
US1stDefinition & source ›
The lead level at the 90th percentile of tap-water samples reported by the public water systems serving this ZIP, in parts per billion — the EPA requires action above 15 ppb.
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 ›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 ›PFOA in drinking water
97.4%
in the top 5.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOA, one of the man-made “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 ›PFOS in drinking water
97.4%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Colon-cancer screening
56.1%
in the bottom 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST26thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Obesity
26.4%
in the bottom 8.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST35thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Expected annual disaster loss
$0
in the top 6.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST74thUS94thDefinition & 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 ›The read
By its overall health score, ZIP 91351, one of several in Canyon Country, California lands in the top 22% healthiest ZIPs nationally (7,165th) and the top 39% of California (667th).
The profile opens on a set of genuinely favorable readings: lead in tap water registers at the national minimum, and modeled obesity sits in the bottom 8.0% nationally. On the other side, slow internet speeds rests in the top 3.3% nationally, and modeled loneliness is in the top 3.7% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise stands in the top 3.8% nationally, modeled tree cover settles at the national minimum, and PFOA in drinking water lies in the top 5.3% nationally. PFOS in drinking water resides in the top 5.5% nationally, modeled colon screening lands in the bottom 6.1% nationally, and modeled expected annual loss registers in the top 6.1% nationally.
Weighed against the ZIPs nearby, slow internet speeds runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. To translate a couple of terms, lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. PFOA in drinking water is one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. 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. Overall, the nearest healthier neighbor is ZIP 91321, 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 93%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 69%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 68%
8%
Disability
healthier than 67%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 66%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 50%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 40%
14%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 14%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 36%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 80%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 68%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 63%
8%
Disability
healthier than 62%
7%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 50%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 46%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 44%
5%
Holding it back
Preventive Care
healthier than 35%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 31%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 63%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 87%
14%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 45%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 43%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 41%
11%
Disability
healthier than 48%
7%
Holding it back
Mental Health
healthier than 37%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 5%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 10%
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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 40.7; chronic-disease standing 93.5 (top 10%) — 53 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #14,670 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
91321
Californiashares a border
Score 57.30
Closest healthier
91350
Californiashares a border
Score 61.88
Similar health profile
95020
California98% similar profile
Score 58.55
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 | 19.2% | 17.7–20.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 27.7% | 25.7–29.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.0% | 5.5–6.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.3% | 8.4–10.3 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.6% | 4.2–5.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.5% | 4.1–5.1 |
| Depression among adults | 20.4% | 18.5–22.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.6% | 9.6–11.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.5% | 33.2–37.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 26.4% | 23.6–29.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.8% | 2.6–3.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.1% | 6.6–9.5 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.8% | 9.4–12.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 69.5% | 66.9–72.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 70.8% | 68.4–73.1 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.1% | 83.6–86.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 56.1% | 52.6–59.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 63.5% | 61.0–65.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.9% | 70.8–80.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.9% | 15.2–18.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.8% | 9.5–12.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.3% | 20.9–25.6 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.4% | 32.4–38.2 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 21.6% | 19.7–23.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.7% | 15.2–18.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.6% | 12.3–14.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.1% | 13.6–16.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 29.6% | 27.2–32.0 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.2% | 4.7–5.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.9% | 7.1–8.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.8% | 11.6–14.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.8% | 3.5–4.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–5.9 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 30.1% | 27.7–32.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.7% | 15.9–19.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 14.8% | 13.1–16.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 15.9% | 14.3–17.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.1% | 8.1–10.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 40.3% | 37.6–43.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.8% | 6.0–7.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 9.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 17.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 25.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 40.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 72.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 6.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 26.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 51.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 14.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 39.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $115,364 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $608,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,341 | $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 | 80.1 yr ± 0.95 | 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 0.95 years of 80.1, 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