ZIP code
95503
in Eureka, CaliforniaPopulation 25,054
50.20/ 100
Ranked #15,958 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 50%)
Ranked #1,057 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 39%)
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 0.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Natural-disaster risk
in the top 1.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Lithium in drinking water
9.5 µg/L
in the bottom 3.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS3rdDefinition & 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 ›PFAS in drinking water
68.3%
in the top 4.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST96thUS95thDefinition & 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 ›Tree cover
77.5%
in the top 5.9% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS94thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
19.5 per million
in the bottom 7.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS7thDefinition & 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 ›The read
ZIP 95503, one of several in Eureka, California, in overall standing, comes out in the top 50% healthiest ZIPs nationally (15,958th) and the bottom 39% of California (1,057th).
An even profile, with readings pulling both ways: lithium in drinking water lands in the bottom 3.4% nationally, modeled tree cover rests in the top 5.9% nationally, and modeled air-toxics cancer risk settles in the bottom 7.4% nationally. Distance to an emergency room lands in the bottom 11.5% nationally. Distance to a nursing home rests at the national minimum, shared with about 27% of ZIPs. Against that, modeled expected annual loss settles in the top 0.7% nationally, and disaster risk lands in the top 1.3% nationally. Modeled pfas rests in the top 4.9% nationally. Fiber broadband settles at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Housing-cost burden lands in the top 12.0% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, expected annual loss runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, expected annual loss is FEMA's modeled estimate, in dollars, of average yearly harm to people from natural hazards. Disaster risk is the area's national rank on its highest non-flood peril in FEMA's modeled Risk Index, like wildfire or quake. Lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 95524, 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
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 90%
14%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 63%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 67%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 91%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 57%
21%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 37%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 29%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 20%
8%
Disability
healthier than 36%
7%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 92%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 81%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 52%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 49%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 24%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 40%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 38%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 10%
8%
Disability
healthier than 34%
7%
“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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 77.1 ± 1.0 years. A median household income of $71,855 predicts 78.8 years — 1.6 years below.
Ranked #2,035 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
95501
Californiashares a border
Score 45.39
Closest healthier
95524
Californiashares a border
Score 56.31
Similar health profile
05156
Vermont94% similar profile
Score 49.46
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 | 27.9% | 25.1–30.9 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 34.8% | 31.3–38.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.4% | 8.6–10.3 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.9% | 9.8–12.2 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.6% | 6.9–8.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 8.1% | 7.4–9.0 |
| Depression among adults | 25.5% | 22.2–29.0 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 12.0% | 10.6–13.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.2% | 33.4–41.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 31.4% | 25.5–37.8 |
| Stroke among adults | 4.1% | 3.8–4.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 11.4% | 9.2–13.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 7.4% | 6.4–8.4 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.5% | 71.6–77.3 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.1% | 69.4–76.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.6% | 83.9–87.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 62.3% | 56.9–67.2 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 61.8% | 58.1–65.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.1% | 67.2–81.6 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.3% | 13.6–19.2 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 14.8% | 13.0–16.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 24.4% | 20.9–28.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.7% | 27.7–40.0 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 22.8% | 20.5–25.3 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.0% | 17.2–21.0 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.4% | 13.9–17.1 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 16.2% | 14.6–17.8 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.3% | 30.6–38.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.9% | 7.1–8.8 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 9.9% | 9.0–10.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 16.7% | 14.9–18.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.6% | 4.2–5.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 5.8% | 5.4–6.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 25.3% | 21.9–29.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 16.4% | 14.3–18.8 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 17.3% | 15.3–19.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 12.9% | 11.3–14.7 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 9.2% | 8.2–10.3 |
| Loneliness among adults | 33.4% | 28.6–38.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 7.8% | 6.8–8.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 13.8% | 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+) | 8.4% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 29.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 90.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 38.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 69.5% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 4.0% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 8.0% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 54.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 22.7% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 41.4 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $71,855 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $444,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,557 | $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 | 77.1 yr ± 0.52 | 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 0.52 years of 77.1, 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