ZIP code
95549
in Kneeland, CaliforniaPopulation 1,024
56.43/ 100
Ranked #7,835 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 24%)
Ranked #700 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 41%)
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
1.2 days/year
in the bottom 0.8% 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 ›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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
2.4%
in the top 3.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST70thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›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 ›Walkability
1.8 intersections/sq mi
in the bottom 6.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST6thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Crowded housing
7.5%
in the top 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST67thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›Transportation noise
0.10%
in the bottom 8.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST5thUS8thDefinition & 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 ›Slow internet speeds
1.3%
in the top 8.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The share of homes whose fastest available download speed is under 10 Mbps.
Full methodology ›Tooth loss
6.7%
in the bottom 7.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST20thUS7thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 65 and older who have lost all of their natural teeth.
Full methodology ›Uninsured (under 65)
4.9%
in the bottom 5.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST14thUS6thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›The read
Kneeland, California (ZIP 95549), by its overall standing, sits in the top 24% healthiest ZIPs nationally (7,835th) and the top 41% of California (700th).
The measures fall on both sides of the ledger for this area: modeled humid heat registers in the bottom 0.8% nationally, lithium in drinking water stands in the bottom 3.4% nationally, and modeled tree cover lands in the top 5.9% nationally. Households without a vehicle is at the national minimum, shared with about 16% of ZIPs. Modeled transportation noise resides in the bottom 8.4% nationally. Set against that, modeled fine-particle rests in the top 3.5% nationally, and walkability lies in the bottom 6.1% nationally. Crowded housing sits in the top 7.6% nationally, and slow internet speeds settles in the top 8.9% nationally. Fiber broadband registers at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs.
Held up against its neighbors, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined in plain terms, lithium in drinking water is a natural metal that dissolves into some groundwater and has no federal drinking-water limit yet. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Humid heat is a modeled heat-stress measure combining temperature, humidity, sun, and wind to gauge heat on the body outdoors. Locally, no neighbor ranks healthier overall than this ZIP.
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
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 66%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 61%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 81%
11%
Disability
healthier than 66%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 99%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 52%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 49%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 47%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 54%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 72%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 79%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 63%
11%
Disability
healthier than 62%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 98%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 52%
16%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 31%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 38%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 33%
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
95503
Californiashares a border
Score 50.20
Similar health profile
05033
Vermont97% similar profile
Score 57.62
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 | 28.4% | 25.3–31.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 35.1% | 31.3–39.1 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.4% | 9.5–11.4 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.2% | 9.1–11.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.2% | 6.4–8.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.0% | 6.0–8.2 |
| Depression among adults | 24.1% | 20.9–27.6 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.4% | 9.9–13.1 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 38.6% | 34.6–42.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 30.3% | 24.5–37.0 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–4.1 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.7% | 5.3–8.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 4.9% | 4.1–6.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.8% | 72.5–78.7 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.0% | 71.5–78.4 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.8% | 87.3–90.2 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.1% | 60.8–70.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 65.6% | 62.0–68.9 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 77.3% | 69.6–83.5 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.6% | 13.9–19.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 12.1% | 10.0–14.4 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 20.1% | 16.7–24.0 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.3% | 26.4–38.6 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 18.8% | 16.2–21.6 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.4% | 14.6–18.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.7% | 11.9–15.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.8% | 11.2–14.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 29.5% | 25.6–33.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.4–8.2 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.7% | 6.7–8.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.3% | 12.2–16.5 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.2 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.4% | 3.9–5.0 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 22.3% | 19.0–25.9 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.9% | 9.0–13.2 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 11.3% | 9.2–13.7 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.2% | 7.7–11.0 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.5% | 5.6–7.6 |
| Loneliness among adults | 30.0% | 25.4–34.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.7% | 4.8–6.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 18.9% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 13.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 3.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 42.1% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 9.3% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 0.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 87.1% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 21.0% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 80.8% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 7.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 5.7% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 78.5% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 14.9% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 36.2 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $95,179 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $651,600 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,750 | $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 unavailable for this ZIP — fewer than 80% of the census tracts that make it up could be matched across the 2010→2020 tract-boundary revision, so no value is published rather than an unreliable one. See how coverage gaps are handled. | |||
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