ZIP code
95662
in Orangevale, CaliforniaPopulation 32,600
53.15/ 100
Ranked #11,858 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 37%)
Ranked #876 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 49%)
Ranked #60 of 122 Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA ZIPs (top 49%)
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 ›Fine-particle (PM2.5) exceedance
2.3%
in the top 3.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST69thUS96thDefinition & 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 ›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 ›Dry extreme heat
81.8 days/year
in the top 4.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST82ndUS95thDefinition & source ›
The average number of days per year with a modeled daily high of at least 95 °F.
Full methodology ›Loud transportation noise
2.1%
in the top 6.9% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST63rdUS93rdDefinition & source ›
The modeled share of residents exposed to average road, rail, and aviation noise at or above 65 decibels — around the volume of normal conversation.
Full methodology ›The read
On balance, and by the composite measure, Orangevale, California (ZIP 95662) ranks in the top 37% healthiest ZIPs nationally (11,858th) and the bottom 49% of California (876th).
Neither strongly one way nor the other, the measures sit mixed: lead in tap water lies at the national minimum, and modeled energy burden resides in the bottom 12.1% nationally. Modeled obesity lands in the bottom 16% nationally, and walkability registers in the top 14.8% nationally. Against that, modeled air-toxics cancer risk sits in the top 0.9% nationally, fine-particle rests in the top 3.6% nationally, and extreme heat is in the top 4.8% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise stands in the top 6.9% nationally, modeled loneliness settles in the top 13.7% nationally, and distance to a Superfund site lies in the bottom 14.4% nationally.
Compared with the ZIPs it borders, park land runs far lower than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. In plainer terms, 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. Lead in tap water is the EPA trigger, 15 parts per billion in tap samples, above which a water system must act on lead. For a healthier nearby ZIP overall, look to ZIP 95628, 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 75%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 70%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 81%
11%
Disability
healthier than 65%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 69%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 40%
13%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 29%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 26%
5%
Lifting this score
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 65%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 62%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 63%
11%
Disability
healthier than 60%
7%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 41%
21%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 46%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 26%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 19%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 24%
5%
Lifting this score
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 60%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 48%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 55%
16%
Preventive Care
healthier than 51%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 53%
11%
Disability
healthier than 55%
7%
Healthcare Access
healthier than 57%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 29%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 20%
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.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 6.2 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 75.3 — 69 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,320 of the 18,187 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by the gap from cleanest environment to heaviest chronic burden, highest first.
Nearby & similar ZIPs
Editorially selected — see how this ZIP compares to nearby and similar places.
Nearby
95610
Californiashares a border
Score 50.00
Closest healthier
95628
Californiashares a border
Score 57.33
Similar health profile
84087
Utah96% similar profile
Score 56.32
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 | 27.1% | 24.3–29.8 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.8% | 28.6–35.0 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 9.1% | 8.2–9.9 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.8% | 9.6–12.0 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.3% | 5.7–6.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.3% | 5.6–7.0 |
| Depression among adults | 25.3% | 22.2–28.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 10.1% | 8.8–11.4 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 35.3% | 31.8–38.8 |
| Obesity among adults | 29.5% | 24.9–34.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.3% | 3.1–3.6 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 9.6% | 7.7–11.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.2% | 5.3–7.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 73.2% | 69.9–76.2 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 71.6% | 68.1–74.9 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 87.2% | 85.6–88.6 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.1% | 61.7–70.1 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.7% | 65.7–71.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.0% | 68.4–80.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 15.8% | 13.3–18.4 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 11.8% | 10.3–13.5 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 18.4% | 15.7–21.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 35.0% | 30.9–39.1 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 19.6% | 17.4–21.8 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.7% | 15.8–19.5 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 13.9% | 12.4–15.5 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 14.2% | 12.7–15.7 |
| Any disability among adults | 30.4% | 27.1–33.8 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.7% | 6.0–7.5 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 8.1% | 7.3–9.0 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 14.1% | 12.5–15.8 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–3.9 |
| Vision disability among adults | 4.4% | 4.0–4.8 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 24.9% | 21.5–28.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 11.1% | 9.4–12.7 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 11.3% | 9.7–13.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.4% | 8.9–11.9 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.1% | 6.2–8.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.7% | 32.3–40.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 5.9% | 5.0–6.7 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.4% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 5.6% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 6.6% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 31.2% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 4.8% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 4.9% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 92.2% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 33.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 75.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.9% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 7.8% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 52.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 20.2% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 42.1 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $96,689 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $558,300 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,903 | $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