ZIP code
95458
in Lucerne, CaliforniaPopulation 3,638
39.29/ 100
Ranked #27,206 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 15%)
Ranked #1,518 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 11.7%)
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.
Loud transportation noise
6.1%
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
2.7%
in the top 3.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST73rdUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Park land
34.3%
in the top 4.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST88thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Elder-services access
0.29 per 1,000 residents
in the top 4.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS95thDefinition & source ›
The number of services for older adults and people with disabilities 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 5.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST77thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Transportation noise
11.5%
in the top 6.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST80thUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Crowded housing
7.8%
in the top 7.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST68thUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Floodplain exposure
29.2%
in the top 10.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST92ndUS90thDefinition & 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 ›Energy-cost burden
4.6%
in the top 14.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS86thDefinition & 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 ›The read
Lucerne, California (ZIP 95458), overall, ranks in the bottom 15% nationally (27,206th) and the bottom 11.7% of California (1,518th).
Several serious readings shape the profile and deserve first mention: modeled loud transportation noise is in the top 0.9% nationally, fine-particle sits in the top 3.0% nationally, and disaster risk lands in the top 5.3% nationally. Modeled transportation noise lies in the top 6.8% nationally, and crowded housing stands in the top 7.0% nationally. Fiber broadband rests at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Floodplain exposure registers in the top 10.5% nationally, and households without a vehicle resides in the top 11.3% nationally. On the better side, park land settles in the top 4.1% nationally, and elder services is in the top 4.7% nationally.
Measured against the nearby ZIPs, loud transportation noise runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. ZIP 95443, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Healthcare Access
healthier than 46%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 34%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 9%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 3%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 21%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 40%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 20%
8%
Disability
healthier than 20%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 20%
5%
Nothing measured is lifting this score.
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 43%
13%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 12%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 15%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 17%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 20%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 11%
8%
Disability
healthier than 19%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 17%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 29%
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
95423
Californiashares a border
Score 37.69
Closest healthier
95443
Californiashares a border
Score 42.96
Similar health profile
96055
California97% similar profile
Score 38.17
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 | 30.2% | 26.8–33.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 40.1% | 35.7–44.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.6% | 8.6–10.6 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.2% | 9.9–12.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.9% | 7.9–9.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 9.7% | 8.4–11.1 |
| Depression among adults | 25.0% | 21.4–28.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 14.3% | 12.4–16.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.1% | 34.6–43.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 33.3% | 25.8–41.7 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.8% | 4.3–5.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.7% | 9.5–14.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 9.3% | 7.8–11.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.6% | 72.3–78.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.6% | 69.5–77.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.4% | 83.5–87.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 62.0% | 56.3–67.4 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 55.8% | 52.0–59.6 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 73.0% | 64.7–80.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.4% | 12.6–18.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 17.0% | 14.4–19.8 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 28.1% | 23.6–33.3 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 36.5% | 30.2–43.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 26.9% | 23.7–30.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.3% | 17.2–21.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 17.8% | 15.7–20.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.7% | 15.7–19.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 38.3% | 33.7–43.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 8.9% | 7.9–10.1 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 11.1% | 9.9–12.5 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 19.8% | 17.3–22.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 5.5% | 4.9–6.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.8% | 6.1–7.6 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 26.6% | 22.7–30.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 18.7% | 15.7–22.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 20.0% | 17.0–23.4 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 14.7% | 12.5–17.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 10.2% | 8.9–11.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 35.6% | 30.3–41.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 8.6% | 7.4–9.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 18.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 11.3% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 7.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 6.4% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.5% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 11.7% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 87.0% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 32.1% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 70.1% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 7.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 2.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 62.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 23.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 43.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $57,674 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $249,500 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,408 | $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 | 71.4 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 71.4, 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