ZIP code
95816
in Sacramento, CaliforniaPopulation 19,225
60.27/ 100
Ranked #4,658 of 32,066 US ZIPs (top 14.6%)
Ranked #493 of 1,719 California ZIPs (top 29%)
Ranked #19 of 122 Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA ZIPs (top 16%)
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.
Dental provider access
2.8 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Outpatient-care access
1.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST99thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of outpatient clinics 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 ›Physician access
6.3 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of physicians’ 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
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 ›Loud transportation noise
5.6%
in the top 1.1% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Walkability
240 intersections/sq mi
in the top 1.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS99thDefinition & source ›
The number of street intersections per square mile — a standard street-connectivity measure; denser networks correlate with more walkable neighborhoods.
Full methodology ›Civic-institution access
1.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 1.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of civic and social organizations 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 ›Transportation noise
24.8%
in the top 1.7% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST95thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›High cholesterol
28.6%
in the bottom 2.3% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST3rdUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults with high cholesterol, among those who have ever been screened for it.
Full methodology ›High blood pressure
23.7%
in the bottom 2.2% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST4thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The estimated share of adults who have been told by a health professional that they have high blood pressure.
Full methodology ›The read
Judged by its overall standing, ZIP 95816, one of several in Sacramento, California sits in the top 14.6% healthiest ZIPs nationally (4,658th) and the top 29% of California (493rd).
A few readings each way define this mixed profile: dental providers lands in the top 0.4% nationally, outpatient rests in the top 0.7% nationally, and physicians settles in the top 0.7% nationally. Walkability lands in the top 1.4% nationally, civic rests in the top 1.7% nationally, and modeled high cholesterol settles in the bottom 2.3% nationally. Modeled high blood pressure lands in the bottom 2.2% nationally. Pulling the other way, modeled air-toxics cancer risk rests in the top 0.9% nationally, and loud transportation noise settles in the top 1.1% nationally. Modeled transportation noise lands in the top 1.7% nationally.
Placed beside its immediate neighbors, dental providers runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. Put plainly, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Loud transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to road, rail, and air noise at or above 65 decibels, near conversation volume. Transportation noise is the modeled share of an area exposed to average road, rail, and air noise at or above 55 decibels. A healthier nearby ZIP overall is ZIP 95818, 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 97%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 96%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 85%
11%
Disability
healthier than 92%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 3%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 22%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 32%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 24%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 93%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 94%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 70%
11%
Disability
healthier than 89%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Preventive Care
healthier than 44%
13%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 14%
14%
Mental Health
healthier than 21%
8%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 23%
5%
Lifting this score
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 97%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
in the top 0.00%
16%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 64%
11%
Disability
healthier than 97%
7%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 56%
5%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 6%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 36%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 22%
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
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 3.0 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 97.2 (top 10%) — 94 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #18,082 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 79.6 ± 1.9 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
95811
Californiashares a border
Score 49.24
Closest healthier
95818
Californiashares a border
Score 60.86
Similar health profile
95678
California97% similar profile
Score 57.03
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 | 18.4% | 16.3–20.5 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 23.7% | 21.0–26.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.2% | 5.6–6.8 |
| Current asthma among adults | 10.2% | 9.0–11.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 3.8% | 3.4–4.2 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 3.7% | 3.3–4.2 |
| Depression among adults | 25.4% | 22.3–28.5 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 6.9% | 6.0–7.8 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 28.6% | 25.5–31.7 |
| Obesity among adults | 27.7% | 23.3–32.2 |
| Stroke among adults | 2.1% | 1.9–2.2 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 6.2% | 4.9–7.6 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 6.0% | 5.1–7.0 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 65.1% | 61.8–68.1 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 67.7% | 64.0–71.3 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 85.2% | 83.4–86.9 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 66.0% | 61.8–69.9 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 68.4% | 65.3–71.1 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 75.8% | 69.2–81.3 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 18.2% | 15.4–21.3 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 8.7% | 7.4–10.2 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 14.4% | 12.1–16.8 |
| 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 | 15.1% | 13.3–17.0 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 17.3% | 15.5–19.3 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 10.4% | 9.2–11.7 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 12.8% | 11.4–14.4 |
| Any disability among adults | 24.1% | 21.2–27.2 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 4.4% | 3.9–5.0 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 6.4% | 5.7–7.2 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 8.8% | 7.7–9.9 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 2.4% | 2.2–2.7 |
| Vision disability among adults | 3.4% | 3.1–3.7 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 23.3% | 20.4–26.4 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.3% | 8.8–12.0 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 10.4% | 8.9–12.0 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 10.5% | 9.1–12.1 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 7.0% | 6.2–8.0 |
| Loneliness among adults | 36.8% | 32.6–40.9 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 6.0% | 5.2–6.9 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 10.0% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 4.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 2.7% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 64.5% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 3.4% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 14.0% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.4% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 39.7% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 29.4% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 1.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 8.6% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 60.9% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 15.6% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 37.0 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $90,839 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $839,700 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,779 | $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 | 79.6 yr ± 0.95 | 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 0.95 years of 79.6, 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