ZIP code
92675
in San Juan Capistrano, CaliforniaPopulation 35,095
62.06/ 100
Ranked #3,488 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 10.9%)
Ranked #406 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 24%)
Ranked #138 of 371 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA ZIPs (top 37%)
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.
Mental-health provider access
0.28 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health 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 ›Dental provider access
1.4 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST93rdUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Outpatient-care access
0.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.1% 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 ›Obesity
25.6%
in the bottom 6.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST29thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
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 ›Loud transportation noise
2.7%
in the top 4.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST72ndUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Median household income
$129,457
in the top 7.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST79thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Recreation access
1.1 per 1,000 residents
in the top 6.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST89thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Energy-cost burden
1.4%
in the bottom 3.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of household income spent on home energy bills — electricity, gas, and heating fuels.
A modeled share of household income spent on home energy. Estimates that hit the model’s 100% ceiling are suppressed rather than published, because at that point the figure reflects the model’s limit rather than a measured burden.
Full methodology ›The read
San Juan Capistrano, California (ZIP 92675), on the composite measure, lands in the top 10.9% healthiest ZIPs nationally (3,488th) and the top 24% of California (406th).
Where the data leans one way, another reading answers it: mental-health providers resides in the top 2.3% nationally, dental providers lies in the top 2.9% nationally, and outpatient settles in the top 3.1% nationally. Modeled obesity stands in the bottom 6.5% nationally, lead in tap water is at the national minimum, and household income rests in the top 7.1% nationally. Recreation sits in the top 6.8% nationally, and modeled energy burden registers in the bottom 3.5% nationally. On the other hand, modeled loud transportation noise lands in the top 4.6% nationally, and tree cover resides at the national minimum.
Set against the neighboring ZIPs, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In everyday language, 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. Energy burden is the share of household income that goes to home energy bills. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 92624, 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 82%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 92%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 87%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 76%
8%
Disability
healthier than 70%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 80%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 90%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 45%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 58%
13%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 88%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 71%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 76%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 73%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 74%
8%
Disability
healthier than 65%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 61%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 80%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 52%
21%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 87%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 89%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 82%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 69%
11%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 68%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 51%
8%
Disability
healthier than 52%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 16%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 39%
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.
Above what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 83.4 ± 1.4 years. A median household income of $129,457 predicts 81.1 years — 2.3 years above.
Ranked #750 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
92624
Californiashares a border
Score 63.52
Closest healthier
92629
Californiashares a border
Score 65.97
Similar health profile
93110
California99% similar profile
Score 63.86
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 | 22.9% | 20.6–25.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.3% | 28.5–34.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.3% | 8.6–10.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.5% | 8.5–10.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.4% | 5.7–7.0 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.2% | 4.6–5.9 |
| Depression among adults | 20.3% | 17.9–22.8 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.2% | 9.9–12.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.2% | 35.1–41.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 25.6% | 22.0–29.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.2% | 3.0–3.5 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.4% | 6.8–10.2 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.7% | 8.2–11.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.7% | 72.7–78.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.2% | 72.4–77.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.9% | 87.5–90.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.2% | 61.3–68.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.4% | 65.7–71.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.3% | 73.7–84.1 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.6% | 13.4–17.9 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.7% | 7.5–10.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 22.5% | 19.8–25.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.7% | 29.1–36.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.5% | 18.4–22.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.7% | 14.1–17.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.2% | 11.8–14.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.0% | 11.6–14.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 29.3% | 26.4–32.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.6% | 5.9–7.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.8% | 12.2–15.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.5% | 3.2–3.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.6% | 21.8–27.5 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.2% | 11.2–15.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.8% | 9.2–12.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.6% | 10.0–13.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.1% | 6.2–8.1 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.7% | 29.3–36.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.7% | 4.9–6.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 10.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 10.3% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 43.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 95.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 35.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 81.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 6.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 17.4% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 52.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 21.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 46.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $129,457 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $993,800 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,438 | $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 | 83.4 yr ± 0.70 | 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 0.70 years of 83.4, 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