ZIP code
95631
in Foresthill, CaliforniaPopulation 6,946
52.11/ 100
Ranked #13,308 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 42%)
Ranked #939 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 45%)
Ranked #70 of 122 Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA ZIPs (bottom 43%)
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.
Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
5.2%
in the top 1.0% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST88thUS99thDefinition & 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
55.1%
in the top 2.0% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area that is public parkland.
Full methodology ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 4.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST10thUS4thDefinition & source ›
The EPA’s modeled screening score for industrial chemical releases, weighting the amounts released by their toxicity and how many people live nearby — a relative comparison score, not a measured exposure.
Full methodology ›Air-toxics cancer risk
39.8 per million
in the top 6.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST61stUS93rdDefinition & 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 ›Arsenic in groundwater
1.5%
in the bottom 12.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST2ndUS13thDefinition & source ›
The modeled probability that untreated groundwater in this area — the source private wells draw on — exceeds the federal arsenic limit of 10 micrograms per liter.
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
60.5%
in the top 14.6% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS85thDefinition & source ›
The share of this ZIP’s land area covered by forest.
Full methodology ›Homeownership rate
87.7%
in the top 24% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS76thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›The read
Foresthill, California (ZIP 95631), in overall standing, comes out in the top 42% healthiest ZIPs nationally (13,308th) and the bottom 45% of California (939th).
A few readings each way define this mixed profile: park land rests in the top 2.0% nationally, and modeled industrial-pollution burden settles in the bottom 4.1% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise lands at the national minimum, shared with about 22% of ZIPs. Home broadband subscription rests in the top 12.7% nationally, and modeled arsenic settles in the bottom 12.8% nationally. Modeled tree cover lands in the top 14.6% nationally. Pulling the other way, modeled fine-particle rests in the top 1.0% nationally, and air-toxics cancer risk settles in the top 6.7% nationally. Crowded housing lands in the top 11.3% nationally, and fatal road crashes rests in the top 14.5% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, park land runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Defined simply, for reference, fine-particle is fine airborne particles about one-thirtieth the width of a hair, counted on modeled days above the EPA standard. Industrial-pollution burden is the EPA's modeled screening score weighting industrial chemical releases by their toxicity and how many people live nearby. Air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. The closest healthier ZIP overall is ZIP 95603, 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
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 68%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 77%
11%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 87%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 54%
21%
Preventive Care
healthier than 51%
13%
Disability
healthier than 53%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 7%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 37%
8%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 62%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 72%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 72%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 57%
11%
Disability
healthier than 51%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 22%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 29%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 28%
8%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 33%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 62%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 85%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 51%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 44%
11%
Disability
healthier than 42%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 41%
5%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 14%
21%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 38%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 31%
8%
“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.
Highest-risk tenth
Air toxics and the years between the two ends of the risk scale
Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is 39.8 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 81.0 ± 3.4 years.
Ranked #1,449 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
95603
Californiashares a border
Score 53.03
Closest healthier
95614
Californiashares a border
Score 58.14
Similar health profile
95601
California97% similar profile
Score 51.61
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 | 29.7% | 26.3–33.3 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 37.3% | 33.2–41.6 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 10.4% | 9.4–11.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.0% | 9.8–12.5 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.5% | 6.7–8.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.6% | 6.4–8.8 |
| Depression among adults | 24.0% | 20.5–27.9 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.5% | 9.8–13.3 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 39.0% | 34.8–43.4 |
| Obesity among adults | 30.8% | 24.5–37.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.9% | 3.5–4.4 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.9% | 7.9–12.3 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.6% | 4.6–6.8 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 74.8% | 71.2–78.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 74.9% | 71.0–78.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 88.2% | 86.5–89.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.9% | 61.0–70.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.2% | 64.7–71.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.0% | 66.3–80.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.4% | 13.5–19.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.2% | 10.9–15.7 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 21.6% | 17.9–25.8 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.1% | 26.8–37.8 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 20.2% | 17.4–23.5 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.6% | 15.6–19.7 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 15.3% | 13.4–17.4 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.5% | 12.6–16.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.7% | 27.5–36.1 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.7% | 6.8–8.7 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.5% | 7.5–9.7 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.6% | 13.4–18.1 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.0% | 3.5–4.6 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.1–5.3 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.0% | 20.5–27.8 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.6% | 9.5–13.9 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 11.6% | 9.5–13.9 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.0% | 8.4–11.7 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.0% | 6.0–8.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 32.4% | 27.6–37.3 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.8% | 5.0–6.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 8.5% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 2.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 5.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 22.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 5.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 5.1% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 96.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 32.9% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 87.7% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 5.8% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 3.9% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 52.2% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 22.5% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 43.6 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $104,402 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $496,900 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,814 | $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 | 81.0 yr ± 1.72 | 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 1.72 years of 81.0, 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