ZIP code
91709
in Chino Hills, CaliforniaPopulation 78,006
63.31/ 100
Ranked #2,807 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 8.8%)
Ranked #346 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 20%)
Ranked #2 of 153 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA ZIPs (top 1.4%)
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.
Lithium in drinking water
9.3 µg/L
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
2.7%
in the top 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST74thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of days in the year when modeled fine-particle (PM2.5) pollution was above the EPA’s daily limit of 35 micrograms per cubic meter.
Full methodology ›Obesity
24.9%
in the bottom 5.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST26thUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
2.6%
in the top 4.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST71stUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST80thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Hearing disability
4.5%
in the bottom 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
39.5 per million
in the top 7.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST60thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Coronary heart disease
4.5%
in the bottom 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST12thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Median household income
$126,350
in the top 7.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST77thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Home broadband subscription
97.5%
in the top 8.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST86thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of households with a broadband internet subscription.
Full methodology ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, Chino Hills, California (ZIP 91709) ranks in the top 8.8% healthiest ZIPs nationally (2,807th) and the top 20% of California (346th).
Neither strongly one way nor the other, the measures sit mixed: lithium in drinking water is in the bottom 2.2% nationally, and modeled obesity stands in the bottom 5.4% nationally. Modeled hearing disability settles in the bottom 3.6% nationally, and coronary heart disease lies in the bottom 5.7% nationally. Household income resides in the top 7.8% nationally, and home broadband subscription lands in the top 8.7% nationally. Against that, modeled fine-particle registers in the top 2.9% nationally, loud transportation noise sits in the top 4.7% nationally, and disaster risk rests in the top 4.8% nationally. Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is in the top 7.0% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 91765, 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 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, 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 96%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 74%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 90%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 94%
8%
Disability
healthier than 92%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 68%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 40%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 5%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 27%
13%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 88%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 80%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 95%
8%
Disability
healthier than 88%
7%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 49%
13%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 45%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 22%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 34%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 97%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 87%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 67%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 95%
11%
Mental Health
in the top 0.7%
8%
Disability
in the top 0.7%
7%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 58%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 44%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 9%
14%
“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 82.1 ± 1.1 years. A median household income of $126,350 predicts 81.0 years — 1.1 years above.
Ranked #1,436 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 5.1 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 95.6 (top 10%) — 91 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,914 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 39.5 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 82.1 ± 1.1 years.
Ranked #1,534 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
91708
Californiashares a border
Score 55.97
Closest healthier
91765
Californiashares a border
Score 66.04
Similar health profile
95131
California100% similar profile
Score 67.91
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 | 19.4% | 17.3–21.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 29.4% | 26.6–32.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.4% | 4.9–6.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.6% | 7.6–9.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.5% | 4.0–5.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.6% | 3.2–4.1 |
| Depression among adults | 16.6% | 14.4–18.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.6% | 9.3–12.0 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.4% | 32.2–38.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 24.9% | 21.4–28.5 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.5% | 2.3–2.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.9% | 5.6–8.5 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.8% | 5.9–7.7 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 71.0% | 67.7–73.9 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.5% | 69.2–75.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.5% | 85.9–88.8 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 57.6% | 53.4–62.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 65.0% | 62.0–68.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.9% | 69.8–81.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.9% | 11.8–16.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.5% | 7.4–9.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 19.8% | 17.2–22.4 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.6% | 31.6–40.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 17.3% | 15.5–19.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.0% | 12.5–15.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.7% | 9.6–12.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.9–12.3 |
| Any disability among adults | 22.9% | 20.4–25.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.0–5.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.8% | 5.2–6.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.7% | 2.5–3.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.8–4.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 28.9% | 25.7–32.2 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.2% | 11.5–15.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.1% | 8.9–11.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.9% | 6.1–7.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.0% | 32.3–39.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.0% | 4.4–5.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 7.6% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.1% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 48.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.9% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 2.5% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 97.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 34.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 69.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.7% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 34.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 49.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 13.8% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 40.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $126,350 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $875,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,894 | $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 | 82.1 yr ± 0.54 | 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 0.54 years of 82.1, 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