ZIP code
92614
in Irvine, CaliforniaPopulation 29,239
66.53/ 100
Ranked #1,428 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 4.5%)
Ranked #201 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 11.7%)
Ranked #63 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (top 17%)
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.
Obesity
20.4%
in the bottom 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST7thUS1stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
4.6%
in the top 1.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Recreation access
1.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of places for physical recreation — gyms, sports, and fitness venues — 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 ›High blood pressure
24.3%
in the bottom 2.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›Civic-institution access
1.2 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations 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 ›Outpatient-care access
0.77 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST95thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient 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 ›Pharmacy access
0.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of pharmacies 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 ›Hearing disability
4.1%
in the bottom 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
3.9%
in the bottom 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
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 ›The read
In its overall standing, ZIP 92614, one of several in Irvine, California lands in the top 4.5% healthiest ZIPs nationally (1,428th) and the top 11.7% of California (201st).
Taken together, the data gives a genuinely mixed reading: modeled obesity stands in the bottom 1.1% nationally, recreation rests in the top 2.2% nationally, and modeled high blood pressure registers in the bottom 2.4% nationally. Civic resides in the top 3.1% nationally, outpatient settles in the top 3.3% nationally, and pharmacy is in the top 3.4% nationally. Modeled hearing disability sits in the bottom 2.3% nationally, and coronary heart disease lands in the bottom 3.0% nationally. Lead in tap water lies at the national minimum. On the other side, modeled loud transportation noise stands in the top 1.6% nationally.
Against the wider neighborhood, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put simply, lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. 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. On the overall standing, ZIP 92604, just across the boundary, ranks healthier.
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 98%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 90%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 91%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 82%
8%
Disability
healthier than 95%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 86%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 41%
13%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 4%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 95%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 86%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 62%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 83%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 81%
8%
Disability
healthier than 94%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 69%
5%
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 57%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 18%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 96%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 83%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 69%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 82%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 63%
8%
Disability
healthier than 94%
7%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 44%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Healthcare Access
healthier than 25%
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 3.9 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 97.8 (top 10%) — 94 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #18,074 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
92604
Californiashares a border
Score 69.61
Closest healthier
92606
Californiashares a border
Score 66.93
Similar health profile
90232
California100% similar profile
Score 66.22
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 | 15.6% | 13.9–17.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 24.3% | 22.0–26.8 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.8% | 5.3–6.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.8% | 7.8–9.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 3.9% | 3.5–4.4 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.4% | 3.0–3.9 |
| Depression among adults | 19.2% | 16.9–21.7 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 8.6% | 7.6–9.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.2% | 30.4–36.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 20.4% | 17.4–23.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.1% | 2.0–2.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 7.0% | 5.7–8.5 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.0% | 4.2–6.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 69.6% | 66.6–72.5 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 72.7% | 69.6–75.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 86.6% | 84.9–88.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 61.3% | 57.3–65.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.1% | 65.4–70.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 80.1% | 74.5–84.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.5% | 13.3–17.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 7.4% | 6.3–8.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 18.6% | 16.1–21.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.2% | 30.5–38.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 15.3% | 13.5–17.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.5% | 13.8–17.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 9.8% | 8.7–11.0 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 11.2% | 9.9–12.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 22.2% | 19.7–24.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.7% | 5.1–6.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 8.7% | 7.7–9.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.3% | 2.1–2.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.4% | 3.1–3.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 26.5% | 23.6–29.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.2% | 9.6–12.9 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 8.9% | 7.6–10.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.1% | 7.9–10.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.4% | 5.6–7.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 34.5% | 31.0–38.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.8% | 4.2–5.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 15.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 3.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 5.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 66.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 97.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 41.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 38.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 4.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 34.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 41.0% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 11.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 33.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $122,821 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $1,076,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,944 | $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 | 82.3 yr ± 0.79 | 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 0.79 years of 82.3, 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