ZIP code
93643
in North Fork, CaliforniaPopulation 3,041
50.42/ 100
Ranked #15,672 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 49%)
Ranked #1,039 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 40%)
Ranked #18 of 65 Fresno, CA ZIPs (top 28%)
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.
Air-toxics cancer risk
60 per million
in the top 0.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
4.1%
in the top 1.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Child-care access
0.96 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of child day-care services 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 ›Grocery access
0.32 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of full supermarkets 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. ZipVitals’s food-access signal is derived from these in-ZIP densities — it is not USDA’s food-desert designation, which measures distance to the nearest supermarket. Where a leg is missing, a ZIP reads “not determinable,” never “not a food desert.”
Full methodology ›Distance to an emergency room
23 mi
in the top 3.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest Medicare-certified hospital with an emergency room.
Full methodology ›Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility
21.4 mi
in the top 4.2% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The distance in miles from this ZIP’s edge to the nearest facility that handles enough hazardous chemicals to require an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases.
Full methodology ›Unemployment rate
12.2%
in the top 6.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST90thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of the civilian labor force that is unemployed.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
0.00%
in the bottom 6.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST14thUS7thDefinition & 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 ›PFAS in drinking water
9.1%
in the bottom 6.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST9thUS7thDefinition & 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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 9.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›The read
In overall standing, North Fork, California (ZIP 93643) comes out in the top 49% healthiest ZIPs nationally (15,672nd) and the bottom 40% of California (1,039th).
Both sides of the picture show up plainly in this area's numbers: childcare lies in the top 2.6% nationally, grocery sits in the top 3.4% nationally, and distance to a hazardous-chemical facility settles in the top 4.2% nationally. Floodplain exposure registers in the bottom 6.6% nationally, modeled pfas stands in the bottom 6.9% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden lands in the bottom 9.0% nationally. By contrast, modeled air-toxics cancer risk is in the top 0.3% nationally, and fine-particle resides in the top 1.5% nationally. Distance to an emergency room rests in the top 3.9% nationally, and unemployment lies in the top 6.2% nationally.
In plain terms, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Distance to a hazardous-chemical facility is a plant handling large amounts of hazardous chemicals that must file an EPA risk-management plan for accidental releases. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 93602, 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 Fresno, CA metro area.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 60%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 83%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 86%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 51%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 58%
8%
Disability
healthier than 45%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 36%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 4%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 27%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 78%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 65%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 69%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 51%
16%
Mental Health
healthier than 51%
8%
Disability
healthier than 42%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 13%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 19%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 17%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 77%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 86%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 81%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 83%
8%
Disability
healthier than 73%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 94%
5%
About typical
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 50%
14%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 9%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 20%
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
93602
Californiashares a border
Score 50.77
Closest healthier
93604
Californiashares a border
Score 51.77
Similar health profile
95717
California98% similar profile
Score 50.59
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 | 32.4% | 28.8–36.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 39.1% | 34.9–43.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 11.7% | 10.6–12.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.0% | 9.7–12.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.6% | 7.6–9.7 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.0% | 6.8–9.4 |
| Depression among adults | 22.2% | 18.8–25.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.8% | 11.1–14.7 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 40.0% | 35.7–44.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 31.7% | 25.1–39.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.4% | 3.9–4.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.4% | 10.8–16.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.7% | 4.6–7.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 77.7% | 74.5–80.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 77.1% | 73.5–80.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.8% | 88.3–91.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.9% | 60.5–70.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 62.2% | 58.4–65.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.4% | 66.3–81.2 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.3% | 11.7–17.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.3% | 10.1–14.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.9% | 18.0–26.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 34.0% | 27.8–40.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 21.5% | 18.5–25.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.6% | 14.6–18.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.2% | 13.2–17.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.7% | 11.9–15.6 |
| Any disability among adults | 33.7% | 29.2–38.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.8% | 7.8–9.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.7% | 7.5–9.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.3% | 14.8–20.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.2% | 3.7–4.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.1% | 4.5–5.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.2% | 19.6–27.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.9% | 9.9–14.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 11.5% | 9.5–13.8 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.8% | 8.3–11.5 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.2% | 6.2–8.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.6% | 26.8–36.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.8% | 5.0–6.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 17.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.0% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 8.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 23.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 12.2% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 97.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 35.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 88.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 0.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 75.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 41.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 61.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $71,082 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $381,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,361 | $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 | 78.0 yr ± 1.41 | 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 1.41 years of 78.0, 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