ZIP code
93276
in Tupman, CaliforniaPopulation 157
32.70/ 100
Ranked #30,118 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 6.1%)
Ranked #1,652 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 3.9%)
Ranked #39 of 48 Bakersfield-Delano, CA ZIPs (bottom 19%)
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.
Dry extreme heat
112.3 days/year
in the top 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Cognitive disability
22.6%
in the top 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions.
Full methodology ›Mammography
65%
in the bottom 2.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST1stUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of women aged 50–74 who had a mammogram within the past two years.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
0.00%
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 55 decibels — a noticeable background presence.
Full methodology ›Households without a vehicle
28.8%
in the top 2.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Poverty rate
40.1%
in the top 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents whose income is below the federal poverty line, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
49.2%
in the top 3.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Arsenic in groundwater
28.3%
in the top 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
A modeled likelihood for untreated groundwater, the source drawn on by private wells, which are federally unregulated. It is not a measurement of treated water delivered by a public system, and it is not a test of any individual well.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
55.1%
in the bottom 5.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST22ndUS5thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›Independent-living disability
13.4%
in the top 5.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have difficulty doing errands alone, such as visiting a doctor’s office, because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.
Full methodology ›The read
Tupman, California (ZIP 93276), by its composite score, sits in the bottom 6.1% nationally (30,118th) and the bottom 3.9% of California (1,652nd).
The measures that define this area's challenges come through directly: modeled extreme heat settles in the top 1.0% nationally, and cognitive disability sits in the top 3.0% nationally. Modeled mammography lies in the bottom 2.9% nationally, and households without a vehicle rests in the top 2.6% nationally. Poverty resides in the top 3.0% nationally, housing-cost burden is in the top 3.4% nationally, and modeled arsenic lands in the top 3.6% nationally. Modeled colon screening stands in the bottom 5.0% nationally, and independent living disability registers in the top 5.5% nationally. On the stronger side, modeled transportation noise settles at the national minimum.
Next to the surrounding area, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. Transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 93206, 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 Bakersfield-Delano, CA metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 73%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 33%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 5%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 5%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 11%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 2%
8%
Disability
healthier than 8%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 22%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 21%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 84%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 12%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 8%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 16%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 4%
11%
Mental Health
in the bottom 0.4%
8%
Disability
healthier than 8%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 21%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 14%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 85%
14%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 43%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 59%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 33%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 30%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 33%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 37%
11%
Mental Health
in the bottom 0.00%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 35%
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 ›
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
93206
Californiashares a border
Score 33.06
Closest healthier
93268
Californiaabout 1.8 mi away
Score 37.60
Similar health profile
96128
California98% similar profile
Score 34.80
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 | 27.5% | 24.6–30.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 35.2% | 31.7–38.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 8.0% | 7.1–8.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 12.6% | 11.1–14.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.3% | 7.2–9.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 10.3% | 8.6–12.3 |
| Depression among adults | 28.7% | 25.2–32.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 13.0% | 11.3–14.9 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.4% | 31.9–39.0 |
| Obesity among adults | 35.7% | 30.0–41.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.6% | 4.0–5.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 24.3% | 20.1–28.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 12.3% | 9.5–15.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 70.6% | 67.3–73.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 71.1% | 67.2–74.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 80.8% | 77.8–83.5 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 55.1% | 49.8–60.7 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 53.2% | 49.7–56.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 65.0% | 56.7–72.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 17.1% | 14.3–20.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 19.6% | 16.1–23.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 31.6% | 26.7–36.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 38.4% | 33.4–43.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 29.5% | 25.2–34.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 23.8% | 21.2–26.6 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 19.0% | 16.5–21.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 22.6% | 19.6–26.0 |
| Any disability among adults | 42.5% | 37.4–47.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.5% | 7.5–9.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 13.4% | 11.5–15.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 21.0% | 18.1–24.4 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.2% | 5.3–7.3 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.0% | 6.8–9.2 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 29.8% | 25.7–33.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 23.9% | 19.7–28.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 26.3% | 21.6–31.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.8% | 15.7–21.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 13.1% | 11.2–15.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 38.5% | 33.8–43.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.8% | 9.1–12.6 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 40.1% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 25.0% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 9.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 13.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 28.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 88.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 49.2% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 61.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 0.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 30.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 12.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 36.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | — | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | — | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $928 | $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 | 76.5 yr ± 1.77 | 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 1.77 years of 76.5, 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