ZIP code
95008
in Campbell, CaliforniaPopulation 48,333
66.17/ 100
Ranked #1,557 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 4.9%)
Ranked #224 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 13.1%)
Ranked #31 of 61 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA ZIPs (bottom 49%)
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.
Expected annual disaster loss
$1
in the top 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST91stUS99thDefinition & source ›
FEMA’s modeled estimate, in dollars per year, of the average harm to people expected from natural hazards — an annualized average, not a forecast for any single year.
Full methodology ›PFOS in drinking water
100%
at the national maximum
Lower is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The share of residents served by public water systems where PFOS, one of the most common “forever chemicals,” was detected in EPA testing.
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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
40.1 per million
in the top 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Obesity
23.9%
in the bottom 4.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST21stUS4thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
3.4%
in the top 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST81stUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Median household income
$141,131
in the top 5.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST84thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The middle household income in this ZIP — half of households earn more, half earn less — in dollars per year.
Full methodology ›Lithium in drinking water
9.5 µg/L
in the bottom 3.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS3rdDefinition & source ›
The average detected level of lithium — a natural trace metal with no federal drinking-water limit yet — across the public water systems serving this ZIP, in micrograms per liter.
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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
589 units
in the top 3.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST90thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Energy-cost burden
1.1%
in the bottom 1.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST6thUS1stDefinition & 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS96thDefinition & source ›
This area’s national rank on its single highest non-flood natural hazard — such as wildfire, tornado, or earthquake — in FEMA’s modeled National Risk Index; flooding is shown separately.
Full methodology ›The read
Campbell, California (ZIP 95008), overall, ranks in the top 4.9% healthiest ZIPs nationally (1,557th) and the top 13.1% of California (224th).
Reading the numbers as a whole, the picture lands somewhere in between: modeled obesity registers in the bottom 4.1% nationally, household income resides in the top 5.0% nationally, and lithium in drinking water settles in the bottom 3.2% nationally. Subsidized affordable housing is in the top 3.6% nationally, and modeled energy burden sits in the bottom 1.4% nationally. On the other side, modeled expected annual loss lands in the top 1.3% nationally, and PFOS in drinking water lies at the national maximum. Modeled air-toxics cancer risk stands in the top 2.3% nationally, and loud transportation noise rests in the top 2.9% nationally. Modeled disaster risk registers in the top 4.4% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. PFOS in drinking water is a common one of the man-made "forever chemicals" that build up in the body and environment instead of breaking down. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. ZIP 95032, just across the boundary, comes out healthier overall.
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 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, 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 96%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 95%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 81%
8%
Disability
healthier than 93%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 81%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 80%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 43%
13%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 90%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 90%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 64%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 89%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 79%
8%
Disability
healthier than 91%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 62%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 60%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 27%
14%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 67%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 68%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 78%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 47%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 55%
11%
Disability
healthier than 52%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 28%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 37%
8%
“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 6.5 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 96.5 (top 10%) — 90 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #17,876 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 40.1 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 81.2 ± 1.0 years.
Ranked #471 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
95032
Californiashares a border
Score 70.68
Closest healthier
95124
Californiashares a border
Score 67.69
Similar health profile
91403
California99% similar profile
Score 66.12
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 | 18.2% | 16.1–20.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 26.9% | 24.1–29.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.8% | 6.2–7.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 8.9% | 7.8–10.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 4.4% | 3.9–4.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.2 |
| Depression among adults | 20.7% | 18.0–23.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 9.2% | 8.0–10.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 33.3% | 30.2–36.5 |
| Obesity among adults | 23.9% | 20.2–27.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.4% | 2.2–2.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.0% | 4.8–7.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.7% | 4.9–6.5 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 70.0% | 66.6–73.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 71.4% | 68.1–74.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.7% | 86.1–89.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 63.1% | 59.0–67.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.1% | 67.3–72.7 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 79.7% | 73.8–84.8 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.8% | 12.6–17.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.3% | 7.2–9.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 19.5% | 16.9–22.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.9% | 27.3–34.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 14.9% | 13.2–16.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.6% | 13.1–16.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.2% | 9.1–11.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 10.8% | 9.7–12.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 23.6% | 20.9–26.4 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.9% | 4.4–5.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 5.6% | 5.0–6.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 9.7% | 8.5–10.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.5% | 2.2–2.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.5% | 3.2–3.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.5% | 22.6–28.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.7% | 8.3–11.1 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 7.7% | 6.6–8.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.1% | 7.9–10.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.8% | 5.1–6.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.9% | 33.0–41.1 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.6% | 3.9–5.2 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 6.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.4% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.8% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 58.9% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.0% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.6% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 93.7% | 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 | 49.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 5.6% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 34.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 46.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 16.4% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 39.7 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $141,131 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $1,633,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,689 | $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 | 81.1 yr ± 0.50 | 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 0.50 years of 81.1, 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