ZIP code
93722
in Fresno, CaliforniaPopulation 86,110
47.75/ 100
Ranked #19,254 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 40%)
Ranked #1,204 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 30%)
Ranked #25 of 65 Fresno, CA ZIPs (top 38%)
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
5.9%
in the top 0.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Dry extreme heat
110.3 days/year
in the top 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST94thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
41.4 per million
in the top 1.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST87thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Crowded housing
12.3%
in the top 3.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST83rdUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Subsidized affordable housing
605 units
in the top 3.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS97thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
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 ›Colon-cancer screening
56.5%
in the bottom 6.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST27thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›High cholesterol
31.6%
in the bottom 5.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST8thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›Loneliness
38%
in the top 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST69thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who report feeling lonely.
Full methodology ›Housing insecurity
19.4%
in the top 9.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST79thUS90thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who experienced housing insecurity in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›The read
On the composite measure, ZIP 93722, one of several in Fresno, California stands in the bottom 40% nationally (19,254th) and the bottom 30% of California (1,204th).
The weightiest signals in the profile are worth naming up front: modeled fine-particle sits in the top 0.8% nationally, and extreme heat resides in the top 1.1% nationally. Modeled air-toxics cancer risk stands in the top 1.9% nationally, and crowded housing sits in the top 3.2% nationally. Modeled tree cover resides at the national minimum, colon screening stands in the bottom 6.6% nationally, and loneliness sits in the top 8.7% nationally. Modeled housing insecurity resides in the top 9.9% nationally. More positively, subsidized affordable housing stands in the top 3.5% nationally, and modeled high cholesterol sits in the bottom 5.7% nationally.
Set beside the wider area around it, outer-floodplain exposure runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For clarity, fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. ZIP 93636, just across the boundary, ranks better overall among the ZIPs nearby.
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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 86%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 84%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 59%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 48%
8%
Disability
healthier than 43%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 14%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 3%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 7%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 19%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
healthier than 67%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 58%
21%
Disability
healthier than 40%
7%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 20%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 23%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 34%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 39%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 17%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 91%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 67%
8%
Disability
healthier than 72%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 75%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 53%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 55%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 55%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 48%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 39%
14%
“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
2 of our published findings list 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 3.6 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 85.7 — 82 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,341 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Highest-risk tenth
Air toxics and the years between the two ends of the risk scale
Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is 41.4 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 78.6 ± 1.2 years.
Ranked #377 of the 4,173 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by modeled air-toxics risk, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
93636
Californiashares a border
Score 50.96
Closest healthier
93711
Californiashares a border
Score 57.02
Similar health profile
92503
California98% similar profile
Score 48.88
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 | 20.1% | 17.9–22.6 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 30.2% | 27.1–33.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 5.1% | 4.6–5.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 9.9% | 8.8–11.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.8–5.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.3% | 4.8–5.9 |
| Depression among adults | 21.0% | 18.3–24.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.9% | 10.5–13.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 31.6% | 28.3–35.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 36.5% | 31.3–42.3 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.1% | 2.9–3.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 13.8% | 11.4–16.4 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 13.2% | 11.6–14.9 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 69.9% | 66.9–73.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 70.7% | 67.1–74.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 82.1% | 80.2–84.0 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 56.5% | 51.9–61.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 55.4% | 52.2–58.8 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 72.6% | 65.6–78.9 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.3% | 12.0–17.1 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.9% | 11.3–14.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 29.7% | 26.1–33.7 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.5% | 31.8–41.4 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 25.9% | 23.4–28.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 18.5% | 16.7–20.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.1% | 12.6–15.8 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.9% | 15.3–18.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.3% | 30.8–38.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 5.6% | 5.0–6.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.4% | 8.5–10.4 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.0% | 13.4–16.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.5% | 4.2–4.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.9% | 6.4–7.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 29.9% | 26.4–33.7 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 24.6% | 21.9–27.5 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 22.0% | 19.6–24.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 19.4% | 17.1–21.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 12.2% | 10.9–13.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 38.0% | 33.6–42.7 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 16.2% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 7.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 16.1% | 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+) | 8.6% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.2% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 90.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 39.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 61.2% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 12.3% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 20.1% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 37.4% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 10.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 32.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $80,285 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $378,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,656 | $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 | 78.6 yr ± 0.59 | 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 0.59 years of 78.6, 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