ZIP code
91786
in Upland, CaliforniaPopulation 55,829
54.31/ 100
Ranked #10,291 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 32%)
Ranked #816 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 47%)
Ranked #47 of 153 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA ZIPs (top 31%)
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.
Dental provider access
1.5 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of dental offices 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
40 per million
in the top 2.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS98thDefinition & 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
$0
in the top 3.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Physician access
2.7 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ offices 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 ›Loud transportation noise
2.8%
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST73rdUS96thDefinition & 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 ›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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
1.8%
in the top 5.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST63rdUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Crowded housing
9.0%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST73rdUS95thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Subsidized affordable housing
345 units
in the top 7.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST82ndUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
0.05%
in the bottom 7.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST15thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area inside FEMA’s 1%-annual-chance floodplain — the “100-year” flood zone, where flooding has about a 1-in-100 chance in any given year.
Measured from FEMA’s mapped flood panels. Where a panel has not been mapped, no value is published for that ZIP — those ZIPs are absent from this comparison rather than counted as unexposed.
Full methodology ›The read
Overall, ZIP 91786, one of several in Upland, California lands in the top 32% healthiest ZIPs nationally (10,291st) and the top 47% of California (816th).
The picture here is genuinely mixed, with readings on both sides: dental providers registers in the top 2.5% nationally, and physicians rests in the top 4.3% nationally. Distance to an emergency room stands at the national minimum, shared with about 11% of ZIPs. Subsidized affordable housing lies in the top 7.0% nationally. On the other side, modeled air-toxics cancer risk lands in the top 2.5% nationally, expected annual loss sits in the top 3.2% nationally, and loud transportation noise is in the top 4.4% nationally. Modeled tree cover settles at the national minimum, modeled fine-particle resides in the top 5.1% nationally, and crowded housing registers in the top 5.5% nationally.
Set beside the nearby areas, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. A note on the terms: 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. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. For a healthier nearby comparison, ZIP 91730, just across the boundary, ranks better 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. 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 89%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 69%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 68%
8%
Disability
healthier than 67%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 56%
16%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 40%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 5%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 11%
13%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 69%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 64%
8%
Disability
healthier than 62%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 55%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 45%
11%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 24%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 30%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 33%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 87%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 73%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 66%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 81%
8%
Disability
healthier than 83%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 42%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 58%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 10%
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
2 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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 5.7 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 89.4 — 84 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,466 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 40.0 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 79.3 ± 1.4 years.
Ranked #504 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
91730
Californiashares a border
Score 54.46
Closest healthier
91784
Californiashares a border
Score 63.92
Similar health profile
92374
California98% similar profile
Score 55.19
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 | 21.1% | 19.0–23.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 30.2% | 27.4–32.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.0% | 5.4–6.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.1% | 4.6–5.6 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 4.6% | 4.1–5.1 |
| Depression among adults | 19.8% | 17.3–22.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.3% | 30.3–36.3 |
| Obesity among adults | 31.4% | 27.3–35.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.9% | 2.6–3.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.9% | 8.1–12.0 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.0% | 10.4–13.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 68.7% | 65.5–71.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 70.2% | 66.9–73.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 84.9% | 83.3–86.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 57.6% | 53.3–62.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 59.0% | 55.9–62.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.2% | 67.9–80.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.1% | 13.8–18.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.8% | 9.4–12.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.1% | 20.1–25.9 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.9% | 32.8–41.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.1% | 19.8–24.4 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.1% | 15.3–18.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.1% | 11.7–14.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 15.0% | 13.4–16.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 28.8% | 25.8–31.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.3% | 4.7–5.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.0% | 7.2–8.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 12.4% | 11.0–13.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.4–4.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.6% | 5.1–6.1 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 28.9% | 25.8–32.1 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.8% | 16.8–21.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 16.3% | 14.5–18.2 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.0% | 14.2–17.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.8% | 8.7–10.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 37.6% | 33.9–41.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.7% | 6.8–8.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 11.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 32.8% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 41.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 45.9% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 9.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 19.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 40.3% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 13.0% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 35.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $92,458 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $641,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,969 | $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 | 79.3 yr ± 0.69 | 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 0.69 years of 79.3, 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