ZIP code
93287
in Woody, CaliforniaPopulation 98
38.31/ 100
Ranked #27,839 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 13.2%)
Ranked #1,546 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 10.1%)
Ranked #23 of 48 Bakersfield-Delano, CA ZIPs (top 48%)
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.
Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
5.5%
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST89thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Mobility disability
25.5%
in the top 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Full methodology ›Coronary heart disease
11.4%
in the top 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease or angina.
Full methodology ›Stroke
6.0%
in the top 4.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have had a stroke.
Full methodology ›Self-care disability
6.6%
in the top 7.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with difficulty dressing or bathing.
Full methodology ›Fair or poor health
29.7%
in the top 8.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who rate their own general health as fair or poor.
Full methodology ›Diabetes
18%
in the top 8.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been diagnosed with diabetes.
Full methodology ›Hearing disability
11.1%
in the top 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who are deaf or have serious difficulty hearing.
Full methodology ›PFAS in drinking water
9.9%
in the bottom 8.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST13thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that PFAS “forever chemicals” would be detected in untreated groundwater in this area, the source private wells draw on.
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 ›Transportation noise
0.14%
in the bottom 9.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS9thDefinition & 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 ›The read
Woody, California (ZIP 93287), on the composite measure, lands in the bottom 13.2% nationally (27,839th) and the bottom 10.1% of California (1,546th).
What the numbers press hardest on defines much of the story here: modeled fine-particle lands in the top 0.9% nationally, mobility disability resides in the top 2.9% nationally, and coronary heart disease lies in the top 3.0% nationally. Modeled stroke settles in the top 4.1% nationally, self-care disability stands in the top 7.9% nationally, and fair or poor health is in the top 8.9% nationally. Modeled diabetes rests in the top 8.1% nationally, and hearing disability sits in the top 8.7% nationally. On the encouraging side, unemployment registers at the national minimum, shared with about 15% of ZIPs. Modeled pfas lands in the bottom 8.9% nationally.
Set against the neighboring ZIPs, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In everyday language, fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Pfas is the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down; here a modeled estimate of the chance a private well contains them. A healthier neighbor overall sits at ZIP 93226, 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
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 66%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 50%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 40%
11%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 6%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 19%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 22%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 26%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 15%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 70%
13%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 54%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 2%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 25%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 20%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 16%
8%
Disability
healthier than 7%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 10%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 70%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 91%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 70%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 67%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 50%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 15%
21%
Disability
healthier than 39%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 24%
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
93215
Californiashares a border
Score 37.20
Closest healthier
93226
Californiashares a border
Score 39.17
Similar health profile
95930
California98% similar profile
Score 32.79
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 | 36.8% | 33.3–40.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 45.9% | 41.8–49.9 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 11.8% | 10.6–13.0 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.6% | 10.3–13.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 11.4% | 10.2–12.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 12.2% | 10.7–14.0 |
| Depression among adults | 24.7% | 21.4–28.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 18.0% | 15.8–20.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 42.6% | 38.4–46.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.5% | 30.8–42.4 |
| Stroke among adults | 6.0% | 5.4–6.7 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 18.7% | 15.3–22.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 8.6% | 7.1–10.6 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.3% | 76.3–82.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 78.8% | 75.8–81.7 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.5% | 86.9–90.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.5% | 60.8–70.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 56.0% | 52.6–59.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.3% | 67.2–80.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.0% | 10.9–15.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 18.1% | 15.2–21.0 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 32.3% | 27.8–37.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.4% | 31.5–41.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 29.7% | 26.2–33.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.6% | 16.5–20.8 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 19.8% | 17.5–22.2 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.3% | 15.2–19.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 43.0% | 38.6–47.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.9–12.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 12.2% | 10.8–13.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 25.5% | 22.6–28.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 6.6% | 5.8–7.5 |
| Vision disability among adults | 8.3% | 7.4–9.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.5% | 22.0–29.3 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 19.3% | 16.1–22.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 22.4% | 18.8–25.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 13.7% | 11.6–16.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.2% | 8.8–11.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.5% | 28.0–37.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.7% | 7.4–10.1 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 14.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 6.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 11.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 0.0% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.3% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 86.7% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 13.3% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 81.7% | 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 | 14.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 69.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 34.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 51.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $49,750 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $261,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | — | $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 ± 1.64 | 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 1.64 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