ZIP code
95460
in Mendocino, CaliforniaPopulation 2,199
57.94/ 100
Ranked #6,455 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 20%)
Ranked #618 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 36%)
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.
Humid extreme heat
1 days/year
in the bottom 0.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS1stDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year when modeled heat stress — temperature, humidity, sun, and wind combined — reaches levels hard on the body outdoors.
Full methodology ›Grocery access
0.42 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Child-care access
0.85 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Obesity
26.1%
in the bottom 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST33rdUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with obesity, defined as a body-mass index of 30 or higher.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
12.4 per million
in the bottom 5.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS6thDefinition & 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 ›Tree cover
77%
in the top 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Utility shut-off threat
4.6%
in the bottom 8.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS9thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults whose household was threatened with a utility shut-off in the past 12 months.
Full methodology ›Short sleep
30.1%
in the bottom 10.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST10thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who usually sleep less than seven hours in a 24-hour period.
Full methodology ›Radon
0.8 pCi/L
in the bottom 9.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST21stUS9thDefinition & source ›
The modeled typical indoor radon level for this area, in picocuries per liter — the EPA recommends fixing a home at 4 pCi/L or above.
Modeled from indoor-radon measurements. In Alaska and Hawaii, where those measurements are not published, a US Geological Survey geologic radon-potential category stands in — a coarser input, disclosed rather than hidden.
Full methodology ›Colon-cancer screening
71.5%
in the top 12.8% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS87thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 45–75 who are up to date on colorectal-cancer screening.
Full methodology ›The read
In overall standing, Mendocino, California (ZIP 95460) comes out in the top 20% healthiest ZIPs nationally (6,455th) and the top 36% of California (618th).
The measures fall on both sides of the ledger for this area: modeled humid heat registers in the bottom 0.7% nationally, grocery stands in the top 2.1% nationally, and childcare lands in the top 3.4% nationally. Modeled obesity is in the bottom 7.4% nationally, air-toxics cancer risk resides in the bottom 5.8% nationally, and tree cover rests in the top 6.1% nationally. Modeled utility shutoff lies in the bottom 8.6% nationally, and short sleep sits in the bottom 10.1% nationally. Park land settles in the top 12.1% nationally. Set against that, fiber broadband registers at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs.
Relative to the ZIPs around it, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plain terms, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. The nearest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 95456, 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.
Compared with the ZIP codes measured across all nine scoring domains — not with all US ZIP codes.
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 63%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 98%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 90%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 94%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 70%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 84%
5%
About typical
Disability
healthier than 51%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 36%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 37%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 99%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 97%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 87%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 66%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 66%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 59%
16%
Disability
healthier than 49%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 13%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 23%
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 ›
Findings that name this ZIP
One of our published findings lists 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.
Clean environment, heavy chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 98.4 (top 10%); chronic-disease standing 35.9 — 63 points apart, cleaner on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #1,565 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
95420
Californiashares a border
Score 54.71
Closest healthier
95456
Californiashares a border
Score 58.90
Similar health profile
28775
North Carolina99% similar profile
Score 56.96
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 | 34.0% | 29.9–38.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 41.4% | 36.6–46.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 13.4% | 12.1–14.7 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.5% | 9.2–11.9 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 8.9% | 7.7–10.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.1% | 6.7–9.7 |
| Depression among adults | 22.5% | 19.0–26.2 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.8% | 10.8–14.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 42.6% | 37.8–47.2 |
| Obesity among adults | 26.1% | 19.9–32.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.4% | 3.9–5.0 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.7% | 6.9–10.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.1% | 4.1–6.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 79.6% | 76.2–82.4 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 79.1% | 75.6–82.2 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 91.2% | 89.9–92.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 71.5% | 66.7–75.8 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.9% | 67.4–74.0 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.7% | 69.7–84.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 13.7% | 11.2–16.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 10.9% | 8.8–13.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 20.8% | 16.8–25.2 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 30.1% | 24.2–36.3 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.6% | 16.5–23.1 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 14.9% | 13.0–17.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.7% | 12.6–16.9 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.3% | 10.5–14.2 |
| Any disability among adults | 32.5% | 27.8–37.3 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 9.1% | 7.9–10.3 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.2% | 7.0–9.6 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 17.0% | 14.2–20.0 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.4–4.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.1–5.5 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 21.1% | 17.8–24.6 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.8% | 8.0–12.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.8% | 7.9–12.1 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 7.9% | 6.6–9.4 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 5.7% | 4.9–6.7 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.9% | 25.9–36.0 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 4.6% | 3.9–5.5 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.0% | 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+) | 5.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 46.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 2.7% | 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 | 91.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 38.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 74.2% | 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 | 1.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 74.7% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 54.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 66.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $73,576 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $708,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,890 | $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 | 84.8 yr ± 2.45 | 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 2.45 years of 84.8, 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