ZIP code
95825
in Sacramento, CaliforniaPopulation 36,156
44.95/ 100
Ranked #22,452 of 32,066 US ZIPs (bottom 30%)
Ranked #1,314 of 1,719 California ZIPs (bottom 24%)
Ranked #109 of 122 Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA ZIPs (bottom 10.7%)
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
2.6 per 1,000 residents
in the top 0.5% 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 ›Air-toxics cancer risk
51.2 per million
in the top 0.6% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST98thUS99thDefinition & 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 ›Subsidized affordable housing
779 units
in the top 2.3% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST94thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of affordable rental units in this ZIP supported by the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.
Full methodology ›Housing-cost burden
52.4%
in the top 2.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST93rdUS98thDefinition & source ›
The share of households spending 30% or more of their income on housing.
Full methodology ›Mental-health provider access
0.28 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.4% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST97thUS98thDefinition & source ›
The number of mental-health 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 ›Loud transportation noise
3.8%
in the top 2.4% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST84thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Outpatient-care access
0.89 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS98thDefinition & 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 ›Homeownership rate
25%
in the bottom 2.5% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST7thUS2ndDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes that are owned, rather than rented, by the people living in them.
Full methodology ›Physician access
3.5 per 1,000 residents
in the top 2.7% nationally
Higher is healthier
ST96thUS97thDefinition & 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 ›Crowded housing
13.4%
in the top 2.8% nationally
Lower is healthier
ST86thUS97thDefinition & source ›
The share of occupied homes with more than one person per room, the Census definition of crowded housing.
Full methodology ›The read
ZIP 95825, one of several in Sacramento, California, by its composite score, sits in the bottom 30% nationally (22,452nd) and the bottom 24% of California (1,314th).
The measures that matter most for this area lead the way: modeled air-toxics cancer risk settles in the top 0.6% nationally, and housing-cost burden sits in the top 2.4% nationally. Modeled loud transportation noise lies in the top 2.4% nationally, and homeownership rests in the bottom 2.5% nationally. Crowded housing resides in the top 2.8% nationally. On the better side, dental providers is in the top 0.5% nationally, subsidized affordable housing lands in the top 2.3% nationally, and mental-health providers stands in the top 2.4% nationally. Outpatient registers in the top 2.5% nationally, and physicians settles in the top 2.7% nationally.
Next to the surrounding area, outer-floodplain exposure runs far higher than the surrounding ZIPs on this measure. For anyone unfamiliar, air-toxics cancer risk is a modeled EPA estimate of added lifetime cancer risk from breathing outdoor air, per million people. Subsidized affordable housing is the main federal tax-credit program (HUD) funding affordable rental housing, counted as local units it supports. 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. For a healthier comparison close by, see ZIP 95819, 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%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 62%
11%
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 45%
16%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 5%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 9%
13%
Mental Health
healthier than 17%
8%
Disability
healthier than 33%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 5%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 41%
21%
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 46%
16%
Holding it back
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 21%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 27%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 38%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 8%
8%
Disability
healthier than 32%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 5%
5%
Lifting this score
Healthcare Access
in the top 0.00%
5%
About typical
Chronic Disease Burden
healthier than 50%
21%
Holding it back
Social Need / SDOH
healthier than 25%
16%
Environmental Hazard
healthier than 20%
14%
Preventive Care
healthier than 12%
13%
Risk Behavior
healthier than 13%
11%
Mental Health
healthier than 8%
8%
Disability
healthier than 14%
7%
Climate / Disaster Risk
healthier than 17%
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 ›
Findings that name this ZIP
3 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.
Below what income predicts
The ZIP codes that outlive their incomes
Estimated life expectancy is 77.1 ± 1.1 years. A median household income of $64,602 predicts 78.4 years — 1.2 years below.
Ranked #1,579 of the 5,842 ZIP codes this finding names, ordered by years above what income predicts, highest first.
Heavy environment, light chronic burden
Where the environment and chronic illness point in opposite directions
Environmental-hazard standing 4.9 (bottom 10%); chronic-disease standing 75.7 — 71 points apart, heavier on the environment than it is on chronic illness.
Ranked #16,460 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 51.2 cases per million — among the tenth of compared ZIP codes with the most. Estimated life expectancy is 77.1 ± 1.1 years.
Ranked #103 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
95815
Californiashares a border
Score 38.04
Closest healthier
95819
Californiashares a border
Score 60.45
Similar health profile
95901
California98% similar profile
Score 41.08
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 | 23.7% | 21.4–26.2 |
| High blood pressure among adults | 31.3% | 28.2–34.4 |
| Cancer (non-skin) or melanoma among adults | 6.9% | 6.2–7.5 |
| Current asthma among adults | 11.1% | 9.9–12.4 |
| Coronary heart disease among adults | 6.2% | 5.6–6.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among adults | 6.7% | 6.0–7.4 |
| Depression among adults | 24.9% | 21.9–28.1 |
| Diagnosed diabetes among adults | 11.1% | 9.7–12.6 |
| High cholesterol among adults who have ever been screened | 32.3% | 29.1–35.6 |
| Obesity among adults | 31.7% | 27.1–36.6 |
| Stroke among adults | 3.6% | 3.3–3.9 |
| All teeth lost among adults aged >=65 years | 14.9% | 12.2–17.7 |
PreventionCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Current lack of health insurance among adults aged 18-64 years | 10.6% | 9.3–12.1 |
| Taking medicine to control high blood pressure among adults with high blood pressure | 70.3% | 67.4–73.0 |
| Visits to doctor for routine checkup within the past year among adults | 69.3% | 65.7–72.6 |
| Cholesterol screening among adults | 81.8% | 79.8–83.7 |
| Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 45–75 years | 61.4% | 57.0–65.6 |
| Visited dentist or dental clinic in the past year among adults | 56.4% | 53.0–59.5 |
| Mammography use among women aged 50-74 years | 71.6% | 64.4–77.7 |
Health Risk BehaviorsCDC PLACES 2022 / 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Binge drinking among adults | 14.2% | 11.8–16.6 |
| Current cigarette smoking among adults | 13.4% | 11.8–15.3 |
| No leisure-time physical activity among adults | 23.6% | 20.5–27.1 |
| Short sleep duration among adults | 39.3% | 35.1–43.5 |
Health StatusCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Fair or poor self-rated health status among adults | 25.1% | 22.6–27.7 |
| Frequent mental distress among adults | 19.9% | 17.9–21.9 |
| Frequent physical distress among adults | 14.9% | 13.3–16.6 |
DisabilityCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive disability among adults | 17.7% | 16.0–19.5 |
| Any disability among adults | 34.9% | 31.4–38.5 |
| Hearing disability among adults | 6.7% | 6.0–7.4 |
| Independent living disability among adults | 10.7% | 9.7–11.8 |
| Mobility disability among adults | 15.8% | 14.1–17.6 |
| Self-care disability among adults | 4.7% | 4.3–5.0 |
| Vision disability among adults | 6.6% | 6.1–7.2 |
Health-Related Social NeedsCDC PLACES 2023 · BRFSS
| Measure | Crude prevalence | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of social and emotional support among adults | 28.6% | 25.1–32.0 |
| Food insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 21.3% | 18.9–23.9 |
| Received food stamps in the past 12 months among adults | 22.8% | 20.5–25.3 |
| Housing insecurity in the past 12 months among adults | 17.6% | 15.6–19.8 |
| Lack of reliable transportation in the past 12 months among adults | 12.4% | 11.1–13.8 |
| Loneliness among adults | 40.6% | 36.1–44.8 |
| Utility services shut-off threat in the past 12 months among adults | 10.4% | 9.1–11.8 |
Community & economyCensus ACS 5-Year · 2024 release · observed
| Measure | Value | US median (p10–p90) | CA median (p10–p90) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Poverty rate | 24.3% | 10.6% (3.1–25.8%) n=32,364 | 10.6% (4.1–24.9%) n=1,714 |
| Uninsured 18–64 | 9.9% | 9.0% (1.5–24.3%) n=32,286 | 7.7% (1.7–17.9%) n=1,704 |
| No HS diploma (25+) | 11.9% | 7.9% (1.8–20.7%) n=32,505 | 9.8% (1.4–30.9%) n=1,729 |
| Bachelor's or higher (25+) | 33.7% | 23.3% (9.2–53.6%) n=32,505 | 31.3% (9.9–68.2%) n=1,729 |
| Unemployment rate (16+) | 8.7% | 3.9% (0.0–9.8%) n=32,274 | 6.1% (0.8–12.0%) n=1,714 |
| Households without a vehicle | 9.4% | 3.9% (0.0–12.5%) n=32,322 | 4.5% (0.0–12.2%) n=1,708 |
| Broadband subscription | 94.9% | 89.3% (75.1–97.1%) n=32,322 | 93.4% (82.1–98.4%) n=1,708 |
| Housing cost burden (≥30% income) | 52.4% | 23.7% (10.6–40.0%) n=32,322 | 38.6% (24.4–50.5%) n=1,708 |
| Homeownership rate | 25.0% | 78.7% (51.7–94.0%) n=32,322 | 64.1% (31.9–86.4%) n=1,708 |
| Crowded housing (>1 per room) | 13.4% | 1.3% (0.0–6.3%) n=32,322 | 4.8% (0.0–15.9%) n=1,708 |
| Foreign-born population | 26.3% | 2.6% (0.0–18.6%) n=32,553 | 18.9% (3.0–40.4%) n=1,730 |
| Single-parent households | 38.1% | 53.6% (37.3–74.1%) n=32,087 | 48.4% (35.1–72.3%) n=1,692 |
| Population 65+ | 15.3% | 19.4% (10.8–33.6%) n=32,553 | 17.0% (9.7–35.7%) n=1,730 |
| Median age | 31.9 yr | 42.2 yr (33.0–56.3) n=32,292 | 40.1 yr (31.8–57.0) n=1,712 |
| Median household income | $64,602 | $72,070 ($46,039–$118,707) n=30,318 | $93,448 ($54,188–$159,562) n=1,584 |
| Median home value | $440,200 | $222,200 ($100,300–$579,820) n=30,049 | $659,800 ($300,520–$1,493,340) n=1,593 |
| Median gross rent | $1,692 | $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 | 77.1 yr ± 0.58 | 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 0.58 years of 77.1, 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