ZIP code
95628
in Fair Oaks, CaliforniaPopulation 44,855
57.33/ 100
Ranked #6,955 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 22%)
Ranked #649 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 38%)
Ranked #37 of 122 Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA ZIPs (top 30%)
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.
Air-toxics cancer risk
50 per million
in the top 0.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Dry extreme heat
83.9 days/year
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS96thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
2.1%
in the top 4.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST66thUS96thDefinition & 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
16.8%
in the top 8.1% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST77thUS92ndDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
0.86 per 1,000 residents
in the top 9.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST80thUS91stDefinition & source ›
The number of dental offices located 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 ›Energy-cost burden
1.8%
in the bottom 8.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST31stUS9thDefinition & 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 ›Uninsured (under 65)
5.5%
in the bottom 10.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST20thUS10thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›The read
Fair Oaks, California (ZIP 95628), in overall standing, comes out in the top 22% healthiest ZIPs nationally (6,955th) and the top 38% of California (649th).
An even profile, with readings pulling both ways: park land lies in the top 8.1% nationally, dental providers registers in the top 9.3% nationally, and modeled obesity is in the bottom 11.4% nationally. Modeled energy burden lies in the bottom 8.7% nationally. Distance to a community health center registers at the national minimum, shared with about 23% of ZIPs. Against that, modeled air-toxics cancer risk is in the top 0.9% nationally, and extreme heat lies in the top 4.4% nationally. Modeled fine-particle registers in the top 4.4% nationally, and loud transportation noise is in the top 10.5% nationally. Outer-floodplain exposure lies in the top 11.5% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Extreme heat is a modeled count of days a year reaching a dangerously high temperature, a leading weather hazard. The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 95630, 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. Compare it against the US, this state and the Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, 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 76%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 84%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 61%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 91%
11%
Disability
healthier than 74%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 93%
5%
About typical
Mental Health
healthier than 53%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 8%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 21%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 79%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 78%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 83%
11%
Disability
healthier than 70%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 88%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 42%
21%
Mental Health
healthier than 46%
8%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 32%
14%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 19%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 80%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 72%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 83%
11%
Disability
healthier than 71%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 88%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 51%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 46%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 53%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 42%
5%
Nothing measured is holding this score back.
“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 8.3 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 76.5 — 68 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,231 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 50.0 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 80.6 ± 0.9 years.
Ranked #122 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
95608
Californiashares a border
Score 52.72
Closest healthier
95630
Californiashares a border
Score 63.24
Similar health profile
64068
Missouri96% similar profile
Score 56.20
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 | 27.6% | 24.7–30.4 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 32.4% | 29.1–35.7 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.9% | 9.0–10.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.3% | 9.2–11.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.4% | 5.7–7.1 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 5.8% | 5.1–6.5 |
| Depression among adults | 23.8% | 20.8–26.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.1% | 8.8–11.5 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 36.3% | 32.7–39.9 |
| Obesity among adults | 28.0% | 23.5–32.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 3.0–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 8.1% | 6.5–9.8 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.5% | 4.7–6.3 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 75.1% | 71.8–78.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 73.4% | 70.0–76.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.7% | 87.4–90.1 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 68.5% | 64.4–72.3 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 70.6% | 67.6–73.2 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.8% | 69.2–81.4 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.9% | 12.6–17.5 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 9.8% | 8.5–11.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 17.1% | 14.5–19.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 33.8% | 29.7–37.7 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 18.0% | 16.0–20.2 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 15.9% | 14.2–17.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.0% | 11.5–14.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.5% | 11.2–13.9 |
| Any disability among adults | 28.9% | 25.7–32.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.8% | 6.0–7.6 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.3% | 6.5–8.1 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 13.5% | 11.9–15.2 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.3% | 3.0–3.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.1% | 3.7–4.4 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.4% | 20.4–26.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 9.3% | 8.0–10.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.2% | 7.9–10.5 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.9% | 7.7–10.2 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.2% | 5.4–6.9 |
| Loneliness among adults | 35.2% | 31.1–39.4 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.0% | 4.3–5.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 7.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.8% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 4.5% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 45.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 6.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 3.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.5% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 31.5% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 71.6% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 3.5% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 13.2% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 53.6% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 22.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 43.3 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $115,803 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $651,400 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,983 | $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 | 80.6 yr ± 0.47 | 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 0.47 years of 80.6, 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