ZIP code
95651
in Lotus, CaliforniaPopulation 729
53.80/ 100
Ranked #10,957 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 34%)
Ranked #842 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 49%)
Ranked #55 of 122 Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA ZIPs (top 45%)
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
4.9%
in the top 1.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Arsenic in groundwater
1.0%
in the bottom 2.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST1stUS3rdDefinition & 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 ›Households without a vehicle
23.8%
in the top 3.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST97thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of households with no vehicle available.
Full methodology ›Dental provider access
1.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 3.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST91stUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
40 per million
in the top 4.5% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST73rdUS96thDefinition & 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 ›Lead in tap water
0 ppb
at the national minimum
Lower is healthier
US1stDefinition & source ›
The lead level at the 90th percentile of tap-water samples reported by the public water systems serving this ZIP, in parts per billion — the EPA requires action above 15 ppb.
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 ›Industrial-pollution burden
in the bottom 9.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST17thUS9thDefinition & 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 ›Uninsured (under 65)
5.2%
in the bottom 7.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST18thUS8thDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults aged 18–64 with no current health-insurance coverage.
Full methodology ›The read
Lotus, California (ZIP 95651), in overall standing, comes out in the top 34% healthiest ZIPs nationally (10,957th) and the top 49% of California (842nd).
A balanced showing across the data, with a few readings each side: modeled arsenic registers in the bottom 2.9% nationally, dental providers is in the top 3.5% nationally, and lead in tap water lies at the national minimum. Modeled industrial-pollution burden registers in the bottom 9.1% nationally, and obesity is in the bottom 11.7% nationally. On the other hand, modeled fine-particle lies in the top 1.2% nationally, and households without a vehicle registers in the top 3.5% nationally. Modeled air-toxics cancer risk is in the top 4.5% nationally. Fiber broadband lies at the national minimum, shared with about 19% of ZIPs. Modeled extreme heat registers in the top 12.7% nationally.
Set within its surrounding area, park land runs far lower 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. Arsenic is a natural groundwater contaminant, here a modeled estimate of the chance private-well levels exceed a benchmark. 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 95614, 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 61%
21%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 81%
11%
Disability
healthier than 61%
7%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 53%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 58%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 58%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 52%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 12%
14%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 28%
5%
Lifting this score
Preventive Care
healthier than 76%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 63%
11%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 53%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 40%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 51%
8%
Disability
healthier than 56%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 27%
21%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 40%
5%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 18%
5%
Lifting this score
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 63%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 69%
13%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 73%
5%
About typical
Risk Behavior
healthier than 53%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 58%
8%
Disability
healthier than 48%
7%
Holding it back
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 20%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 35%
16%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 19%
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
95614
Californiashares a border
Score 58.14
Closest healthier
95664
Californiashares a border
Score 58.40
Similar health profile
55113
Minnesota95% similar profile
Score 62.91
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 | 29.4% | 25.8–33.0 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 35.9% | 31.8–40.2 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 11.1% | 10.1–12.2 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.3% | 9.0–11.6 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 7.5% | 6.6–8.5 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 7.0% | 6.0–8.1 |
| Depression among adults | 22.9% | 19.5–26.4 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.5% | 9.8–13.2 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 37.7% | 33.3–42.1 |
| Obesity among adults | 28.1% | 22.0–34.9 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.8% | 3.4–4.3 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 10.2% | 8.2–12.5 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 5.2% | 4.2–6.2 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 76.5% | 73.0–79.6 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 75.9% | 72.3–79.5 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 89.0% | 87.5–90.4 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 65.2% | 60.2–70.0 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.3% | 65.0–71.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 74.0% | 66.2–81.0 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 16.6% | 13.7–19.8 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.7% | 9.6–14.1 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 20.3% | 16.6–24.5 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 32.5% | 27.0–38.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.0% | 16.3–22.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 16.1% | 14.1–18.2 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.3% | 12.4–16.3 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 13.3% | 11.6–15.1 |
| Any disability among adults | 31.9% | 27.6–36.6 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 7.8% | 6.9–8.9 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 7.9% | 6.8–8.9 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.3% | 13.1–17.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.7% | 3.2–4.1 |
| 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 | 22.5% | 19.2–26.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.5% | 8.7–12.4 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 9.9% | 8.2–11.6 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 8.9% | 7.5–10.3 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 6.3% | 5.4–7.2 |
| Loneliness among adults | 31.9% | 27.1–36.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.1% | 4.3–5.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 5.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 2.7% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 13.1% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 34.6% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 7.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 23.8% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 86.6% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 37.6% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 61.7% | 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 | 8.5% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 61.8% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 10.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 44.5 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $103,537 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $597,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $2,104 | $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